# Emails

DocNumber: C05769817
MetadataSubject: BLAIR STATEMENT
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769817/C05769817.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Blair statement
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ©state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 11:26 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769817
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  The first has Mitchell's edits, the second is original from Blair's guy to Mara:
  Draft Statement by the Secretary as Revised by Senator Mitchell
  Original Draft Statement by the Secretary Submitted by Tony Blair
  The United States is determined to bring about a two-state solution. Believes there is a strong basis for doing
  so. Believes it can be done by combining a renewed political negotiation with change on the ground, bottom up, as set
  out in Prime Minister Fayyad's plan for a Palestinian state.
  To this end,,Tony Blair, as Quartet Representative, will work in partnership with Senator Mitchell to support the political
  negotiation by mobilizing the efforts of the international community: (1) to build support for the institutional capacity
  and future governance of a future Palestinian state; (2) to improve freedom of movement and access for Palestinians;
  (3) to encourage further private sector investment; and (4) to bring change in the living conditions of the people in Gaza.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769817 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ©state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 11:26 AM
  To:
  Subject: Blair statement
  The first has Mitchell's edits, the second is original from Blair's guy to Mara:
  Draft Statement by the Secretary as Revised by Senator Mitchell
  Original Draft Statement by the Secretary Submitted by Tony Blair
  The United States is determined to bring about a two-state solution. Believes there is a strong basis for doing
  so. Believes it can be done by combining a renewed political negotiation with change on the ground, bottom up, as set
  out in Prime Minister Fayyad's plan for a Palestinian state.
  To this end,,Tony Blair, as Quartet Representative, will work in partnership with Senator Mitchell to support the political
  negotiation by mobilizing the efforts of the international community: (1) to build support for the institutional capacity
  and future governance of a future Palestinian state; (2) to improve freedom of movement and access for Palestinians;
  (3) to encourage further private sector investment; and (4) to bring change in the living conditions of the people in Gaza.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769817 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769819
MetadataSubject: JUST GOT THE BLAIR THING FOR WHATEVER REASON
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769819/C05769819.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Just got the Blair thing for whatever reason
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 12:22 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769819
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769819 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 12:22 PM
  To: H
  Subject: Just got the Blair thing for whatever reason
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769819 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769820
MetadataSubject: INSULZA
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769820/C05769820.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Insulza
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Mills, Cheryl D
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 12:34 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769820
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: More from Tom.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769820 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 12:34 PM
  To:
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Fw: Insulza
  More from Tom.
  Original Message
  From: Shannon, Thomas A
  To: Sullivan, Jacob .1
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 11:06:26 2010
  Subject: RE: Insulza
  SBU
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 12:52 PM
  To: Shannon, Thomas A
  Subject: Re: Insulza
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769820 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769820 Date: 08/31/2015
  Original Message
  From: Shannon, Thomas A
  To: Sullivan, Jacob i
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 09:33:26 2010
  Subject: RE: Insulza
  SBU
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacob .1
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:49 AM
  To: Shannon, Thomas A
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769820 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769820 Date: 08/31/2015
  Subject: Insulza
  Tomorrow's wapo editorial makes a pretty good case about insulza and the oas. What are your thoughts on how to
  proceed?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769820 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769821
MetadataSubject: FLOTUS RE XFLOTUS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-03-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769821/C05769821.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769821
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  PIR <preines(
  Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:16 PM
  CDM; Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
  FLOTUS re XFLOTUS
  From Larry King last night:
  LARRY KING: How is the -- it was so bitter -- well, rather bitter in the campaign with Hillary, when they were going at
  each other.
  MICHELLE OBAMA: Yes, it seems so long ago.
  KING: Yes. How are they doing now together?
  OBAMA: They're great. Hillary Clinton is an amazing secretary of State. I mean she would have been an amazing
  president. She was an amazing attorney. She's a phenomenal professional. And she's proven to be a tremendous asset in
  -- in so many ways. So the relationship is -- is -- is strong. They share the same views in terms of international policy and
  approach. And we're seeing the outcome of that on the international stage. I think, you know, we can say pretty clearly
  that the United States -- the -- the view of this nation around the world has changed. People are enthusiastic about the
  potential. Things aren't perfect. We're still a nation fighting two wars. But when we travel around the country, the
  excitement and the possibility are palpable. And I think that's because of the president, but I think it's also because of
  our secretary of State.
  http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1002/09/1k1.01.html

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769821 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  PIR <preines(
  Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:16 PM
  CDM; Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
  FLOTUS re XFLOTUS
  From Larry King last night:
  LARRY KING: How is the -- it was so bitter -- well, rather bitter in the campaign with Hillary, when they were going at
  each other.
  MICHELLE OBAMA: Yes, it seems so long ago.
  KING: Yes. How are they doing now together?
  OBAMA: They're great. Hillary Clinton is an amazing secretary of State. I mean she would have been an amazing
  president. She was an amazing attorney. She's a phenomenal professional. And she's proven to be a tremendous asset in
  -- in so many ways. So the relationship is -- is -- is strong. They share the same views in terms of international policy and
  approach. And we're seeing the outcome of that on the international stage. I think, you know, we can say pretty clearly
  that the United States -- the -- the view of this nation around the world has changed. People are enthusiastic about the
  potential. Things aren't perfect. We're still a nation fighting two wars. But when we travel around the country, the
  excitement and the possibility are palpable. And I think that's because of the president, but I think it's also because of
  our secretary of State.
  http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1002/09/1k1.01.html
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769821 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769822
MetadataSubject: IRAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769822/C05769822.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Iran
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:57 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769822
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  1.4(B)
  1.4(D)
  B1
  B5
  I called Bill about that this morning when I saw the stories.
  In short, he thinks this is all playing out in Moscow, not in Geneva.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769822 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  1.4(B),B1,B5,1.4(D)
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:57 PM
  To:
  Subject Re: Iran
  1.4(B)
  1.4(D)
  B1
  B5
  I called Bill about that this morning when I saw the stories.
  In short, he thinks this is all playing out in Moscow, not in Geneva.
  Original Message ----
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan,,Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 13:22:32 2010
  Subject: Iran
  In stories today Pi suggests we're open to alternatives to our TRR proposal. The WSJ says it's a reversal of position. What
  gives?
  Classified by DAS, A/GIS, DoS on 08/27/2015 — Class: CONFIDENTIAL
  — Reason: 1.4(B), 1.4(D) — Declassify on: 02/10/2025
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769822 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769823
MetadataSubject: TFTP
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769823/C05769823.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Tftp
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:00 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769823
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Troubling news from Europe.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769823 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:00 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: Tftp
  Troubling news from Europe.
  Original Message
  From: Jones, Stuart
  To: Gordon, Philip H; McEldowney, Nancy E; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 13:40:36 2010
  Subject: Tftp
  Jake, we just got off conf call re status of ep vote on tftp. The debate this aft was dramatic. The council + commission
  apologized for mishandling the issue + begged mep's not to take out their frustration on interim agreement which is
  saving lives. Both epp leader ver hofstadt + socialist leader schultz responded by openly advocating postponement.
  After debate party leaders met but failed to achieve consensus on postponement.
  We are now working on contingency press guidance.
  Stu
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769823 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769825
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) UN COUNCIL TO VOTE JUNE 9 ON IRAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-08T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769825/C05769825.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: (Reuters) UN council to vote June 9 on Iran
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH©state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-II
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 8, 2010 1:41 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769825
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769825 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH©state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 8, 2010 1:41 PM
  To:
  Subject Fw: (Reuters) UN council to vote June 9 on Iran
  From: Withers, Anne M
  To: NEWS-Iran; NEWS-Mahogany
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-II
  Sent: Tue Jun 08 13:30:25 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) UN council to vote June 9 on Iran
  UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The UN Security Council will vote the morning of Rine 9 on a resolution imposing a fresh
  round of sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program, France's UN Ambassador Gerard Araud said.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769825 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769826
MetadataSubject: IRAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769826/C05769826.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Iran
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:37 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769826
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769826 Date: 08/31/2015
  Classified by DAS, A/GIS, DoS on 08/27/2015 — Class: CONFIDENTIAL
  — Reason: 1.4(B), 1.4(D) — Declassify on: 02/10/2025
  RELEASE IN PART
  1.4(B),B1,B5,1.4(D)
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:37 PM
  To:
  Subject Re: Iran
  Original Message ----
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:35:07 2010
  Subject: Re: Iran
  Original Message ----
  From: Sullivan, Jacobi <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 13:57:13 2010
  Subject: Re: Iran
  1 4(B)
  1.4(D)
  B1
  B5
  I called Bill about that this morning when I saw the stories.
  In short, he thinks this is all playing out in Moscow, not in Geneva.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 13:22:32 2010
  Subject: Iran
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769826 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769826 Date: 08/31/2015
  In stories today 1
  ).1 suggests we're open to alternatives to our TRR proposal. The WSJ says it's a reversal of position. What
  gives?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769826 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769828
MetadataSubject: IRAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769828/C05769828.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Iran
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:02 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769828
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: B5
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769828 Date: 08/31/2015
  Classified by DAS, A/GIS, DoS on 08/27/2015 — Class:
  CONFIDENTIAL — Reason: 1.4(B), 1.4(D) — Declassify on: 02/10/2025
  RELEASE IN PART
  1.4(B),B1,B5,1.4(D)
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:02 PM
  To:
  Subject Re: Iran
  B5
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacobi
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:00:02 2010
  Subject: Re: Iran
  B5
  Original Message ---
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:37:23 2010
  Subject: Re: Iran
  B5
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan,'Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:35:07 2010
  Subject: Re: Iran
  B5
  Original,Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <SullivanJ1@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 13:57:13 2010
  Subject: Re: Iran
  I called Bill about that this morning when I saw the stories. 1.4(B)
  1.4(D)
  B1
  B5
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769828 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769828 Date: 08/31/2015
  1.4(D)
  B1
  B5
  In short, he thinks this is all playing out in Moscow, not in Geneva.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 13:22:32 2010
  Subject: Iran
  In stories today P.1 suggests we're open to alternatives to our TRR proposal. The WSJ says it's a reversal of position. What
  gives?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769828 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769830
MetadataSubject: GOVERNOR RICHARDSON'S INQUIRIES RE MISSIONARIES, TRAVEL, AND SUPPLIES
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769830/C05769830.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_SWO-Only
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:07 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769830
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: sigh
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769830 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:07 PM
  To:
  Subject RN: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  sigh
  From: Banks, Dana
  To: SES_DutyDeputies
  Cc: SES-O_SWO-Only
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:51:27 2010
  Subject: FW: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  Dan,
  Wanted to bring this to your attention. Gov. Bill Richardson called the taskforce today to inquiring about travel to
  Haiti. His specific concerns were:
  O An update on the court proceedings of the missionaries, particularly whether or not a Haitian court decision is
  imminent;
  O Information on whether or not he could travel to Haiti and how to set up a trip;
  O Information on whether or not he could travel by private plane;
  O A list of what supplies are needed in Haiti; and
  O Direction on how to deliver those supplies.
  He said he may not travel if he receives an indication that the case of the Amcit missionaries would be decided
  sometime in the next few days.
  H has been informed. Please let us know if you would like us to forward to C or M.
  Dana
  From: Haiti TaskForce1D-DepCoordinator
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:41 PM
  To: TaskForce-1; Cleveland, Charlena A; Elder, Christine A; Christman, Kim N;
  Psyhos, Nicholas A; Bulgrin, Julie K; Hall, Suzanne K; Tomlinson, Daniel W;
  Van Buskirk, Raymond M; Kim, Haelee (LAC/AA/CUBA); Finnegan, Joseph P; Youmans, Frances; Dubois, Kim F; Bradford,
  Qiana; SES-O_Shift-II
  Cc: xHaiti File Mail
  Subject: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson called the Haiti Task Force at 1300 EST on February 10 to inquire about
  1)the status of the missionaries;
  2) how to get to Haiti; and
  3) how to deliver supplies needed on the ground.
  The three missionaries in question -
  The
  and
  The three all have relatives living in
  intervene in the case.
  are now
  who have contacted Governor Richardson to
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769830 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769830 Date: 08/31/2015
  Governor Richardson understood that a Haitian court would decide the missionaries' case on February 10 and said there
  was some speculation that the missionaries would be released. If they are not going to be released, then Governor
  Richardson is considering traveling to Haiti to inquire about the status of the missionaries, deliver needed supplies to
  Haitians, and meet with President Preval Governor Richardson emphasized
  that the trip plans could be eliminated if he received some indication that the case would be decided sometime in the
  next few days.
  Governor Richardson specifically requested:
  • An update on the court proceedings of the missionaries, particularly whether or not a Haitian court decision is
  imminent;
  • Information on whether or not he could travel to Haiti and how to set up a trip;
  • Information on whether or not he could travel by private plane;
  • A list of what supplies are needed in Haiti; and
  • Direction on how to deliver those supplies.
  The answers to the questions above can be sent to:
  Alarie Ray
  Communications Director
  New Mexico Governor's Office
  Office: (505) 476-2248
  Cell:
  Also, his secretary's contact information is:
  Janis Hartley
  Office: (505) 476-2245
  Cell:
  Thank you,
  Oni
  Oni Blair
  Haiti Task Force Deputy Coordinator
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769830 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769831
MetadataSubject: DIANE WATSON TO RETIRE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769831/C05769831.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Diane Watson to retire
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:11 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769831
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769831 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:11 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: Diane Watson to retire
  From: Dan Schwerin
  To: Balderston, Kris M; Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:49:29 2010
  Subject: Diane Watson to retire
  Rep. Watson to retire
  By Aaron Blake - 02/10/10 11:51 AM ET
  Rep. Diane Watson (D-Calif.) is set to announce her retirement, according to Democratic sources.
  Watson's central Los Angeles district isn't expected to be competitive in the general election, as it
  carries a distinct Democratic advantage as a majority-minority district. President Barack Obama
  won it 87-12 in 2008.
  Former California State Assembly Speaker Karen Bass is thought to be an early front-runner to
  replace Watson.
  Watson, 76, has served in Congress since 2001. Prior to that, President Bill Clinton appointed her
  ambassador to Micronesia.
  Source: '
  http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/80575-watson-to-retire
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769831 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769832
MetadataSubject: 4PM OAS CALL CONFIRMED
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769832/C05769832.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:16 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769832
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Jake Sullivan
  Cheryl Mills
  Mike Fuchs
  Carmen LomeIlin
  Craig Kelly
  Jim Steinberg (tentative)
  Arturo Valenzuela
  Anne-Marie Slaughter
  Ops will connect to you.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769832 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:16 PM
  To:
  Subject 4pm oas call confirmed
  Jake Sullivan
  Cheryl Mills
  Mike Fuchs
  Carmen LomeIlin
  Craig Kelly
  Jim Steinberg (tentative)
  Arturo Valenzuela
  Anne-Marie Slaughter
  Ops will connect to you.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769832 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769833
MetadataSubject: GOVERNOR RICHARDSON'S INQUIRIES RE MISSIONARIES, TRAVEL, AND SUPPLIES
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769833/C05769833.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_SWO-Only
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:24 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769833
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Will call when I get off call before 4pm
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769833 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:24 PM
  To:
  Subject RE: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  Will call when I get off call before 4pm
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com)
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:10 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Re: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  When can you talk? I'm free until 4 and after 7.
  Original Message ---
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:06:45 2010
  Subject: FW: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  sigh
  From: Banks, Dana
  To: SES_DutyDeputies
  Cc: SES-O_SWO-Only
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:51:27 2010
  Subject: FW: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  Dan,
  Wanted to bring this to your attention. Gov. Bill Richardson called the taskforce today to inquiring about travel to Haiti.
  His specific concerns were:
  An update on the court proceedings of the missionaries, particularly whether or not a Haitian court decision is
  imminent;
  Information on whether or not he could travel to Haiti and how to set up a trip;
  Information on whether or not he could travel by private plane;
  A list of what supplies are needed in Haiti; and
  Direction on how to deliver those supplies.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769833 Date: 08/31/2015

  and
  The three all have relatives living in
  case.
  , are now
  .ftrho have contacted Governor Richardson to intervene in the
  The
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769833 Date: 08/31/2015
  He said he may not travel if he receives an indication that the case of the Amcit missionaries would be decided
  sometime in the next few days.
  H has been informed. Please let us know if you would like us to forward to C or M.
  Dana
  From: Haiti TaskForce1D-DepCoordinator
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 1:41 PM
  To: TaskForce-1; Cleveland, Charlena A; Elder, Christine A; Christman, Kim N; B6
  Psyhos, Nicholas A; Bulgrin, Julie K; Hall, Suzanne K; Tomlinson, Daniel W;
  Van Buskirk,,Raymond M; Kim, Haelee (LAC/AA/CUBA); Finnegan, Joseph P; Youmans, Frances; Dubois, Kim F; Bradford,
  Qiana; SES-O_Shift-11
  Cc: xHaiti File Mail
  Subject: Governor Richardson's inquiries re missionaries, travel, and supplies
  New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson called the Haiti Task Force at 1300 EST on February 10 to inquire about
  1)the status, of the missionaries;
  2) how to get to Haiti; and
  3) how to deliver supplies needed on the ground.
  The three missionaries in question -
  Governor Riichardson understood that a Haitian court would decide the missionaries' case on February 10 and said there
  was some speculation that the missionaries would be released. If they are not going to be released, then Governor
  Richardson is considering traveling to Haiti to inquire about the status of the missionaries, deliver needed supplies to
  Haitians, and meet with President Preval Governor Richardson emphasized
  that the trip plans could be eliminated if he received some indication that the case would be decided sometime in the
  next few days.
  Governor Richardson specifically requested:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769833 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769833 Date: 08/31/2015
  An update on the court proceedings of the missionaries, particularly whether or not a Haitian court decision is
  imminent;
  Information on whether or not he could travel to Haiti and how to set up a trip;
  Information on whether or not he could travel by private plane;
  A list of what supplies are needed in Haiti; and
  Direction on how to deliver those supplies.
  The answers to the questions above can be sent to:
  Alarie Ray
  Communications Director
  New Mexico Governor's Office
  Office: (505) 476-2248
  Cell:
  Also, his secretary's contact information is:
  Janis Hartley
  Office: (505) 476-2245
  Cell:
  Thank you,
  Oni
  Oni Blair
  Haiti Task Force Deputy Coordinator
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769833 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769834
MetadataSubject: MOTHER TERESA
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769834/C05769834.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Mother Teresa
ExtractedFrom: PIR
ExtractedCc: Huma Abedin
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:33 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769834
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Just FYI on the below, from one of those crazy right "magazines" - notes that the home you referenced in your Prayer
  Breakfast remarks has since closed.
  I checked in with Lissa & Melanne, they didn't know it closed, which makes sense since it happened in 2002 after you left
  the White House.
  I made it clear that your longtime commitment to this issue - throughout your public career - is well known, and you
  remain very proud of your work with Mother Teresa in opening this home in 1995. And that your partnership is a
  success story to be emulated.
  Again, this is just FYI
  http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16398
  ADOPTION I Hillary Clinton continues to hail an adoption home she helped open with Mother Teresa that has since
  closed its doors By Emily Belz
  WASHINGTON—An adoption ministry Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hailed as a home she helped open with Mother
  Teresa no longer handles adoptions and its phone line has been disconnected, though at last week's National Prayer
  Breakfast Clinton spent five minutes of her 30-minute speech relating the story of its opening. Last Thursday Clinton
  described Mother Teresa "beaming about what this meant for children and their futures," seemingly oblivious that the
  Mother Teresa Home for Infant Children in northwest Washington, D.C., is now defunct. She said she worked tirelessly
  to "cut through all the red tape," although it appears that red tape prevented the work from continuing. According to a
  pastor at the church next door to the home's former location, the adoption ministry failed to take off because the
  Roman Catholic nuns who ran it weren't allowed to care for babies without medical personnel on site. "I'm not sure the
  legal thing that came down upon them, but they realized they needed to expend their energies in another way," said
  Maureen Freshour, who along with her husband, David, pastors Chevy Chase Baptist Church and lives nearby. Freshour
  has stayed in touch with the nuns from the Missionaries of Charity order who ran the home and said that the remaining
  three or four sisters have moved to another house in Washington, where they are ministering to the homeless."This has
  been a core issue—adoption—whether the home [Clinton] talked about survived or not," said Chuck Johnson, chief
  operating officer of the National Council for Adoption. "It's an issue she's been consistent on."During her speech on
  Thursday, Clinton reminisced about the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast when she attended as first lady and Mother
  Teresa was the speaker. The Roman Catholic nun delivered a blistering speech about abortion, saying, "Any country that
  accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want." Mother Teresa then
  called on attendees to fight abortion through adoption: "Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the
  child."The audience that day gave her a standing ovation—but President and Mrs. Clinton, both pro-abortion, did not
  stand. Afterward, Mother Teresa asked to meet with Hillary Clinton and they went to talk behind a curtain on the stage,
  sitting on folding chairs, Mother Teresa in sandals even though it was winter."She told me that she knew that we had a
  shared conviction about adoption being vastly better as a choice for unplanned or unwanted babies," Clinton related last
  Thursday. "And she asked me—or more properly, she directed me—to work with her to create a home for such babies
  here in Washington."Clinton followed through and set up a home for unwanted babies in Washington in just over a year,
  no small feat in a city that was known then for its inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy. The Mother Teresa Home for
  Infant Children opened in June 1995 in the district's affluent Chevy Chase neighborhood to house eight pregnant
  mothers and their babies—but it remains unclear whether it facilitated any adoptions.I called the Missionaries of Charity
  in Washington, a worldwide Roman Catholic order established by Mother Teresa. The nun who answered the phone said
  she couldn't give her name because they aren't allowed to talk to the press. She did say, however, that the sisters who
  are in the order now were not in the order when the adoption home opened, so she wasn't sure why it closed. She
  added that the order sold the Chevy Chase house in 2002. "We work with the poor and we didn't have any work there
  because it's a rich neighborhood," she said. The sisters, she added, are now working with the homeless and those with
  AIDS in a more transitional neighborhood in the northeast section of town on Otis Street.
  ###

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769834 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: PIR
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:33 PM
  To:
  Cc: Huma Abedin
  Subject: Mother Teresa
  Just FYI on the below, from one of those crazy right "magazines" - notes that the home you referenced in your Prayer
  Breakfast remarks has since closed.
  I checked in with Lissa & Melanne, they didn't know it closed, which makes sense since it happened in 2002 after you left
  the White House.
  I made it clear that your longtime commitment to this issue - throughout your public career - is well known, and you
  remain very proud of your work with Mother Teresa in opening this home in 1995. And that your partnership is a
  success story to be emulated.
  Again, this is just FYI
  http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16398
  ADOPTION I Hillary Clinton continues to hail an adoption home she helped open with Mother Teresa that has since
  closed its doors By Emily Belz
  WASHINGTON—An adoption ministry Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hailed as a home she helped open with Mother
  Teresa no longer handles adoptions and its phone line has been disconnected, though at last week's National Prayer
  Breakfast Clinton spent five minutes of her 30-minute speech relating the story of its opening. Last Thursday Clinton
  described Mother Teresa "beaming about what this meant for children and their futures," seemingly oblivious that the
  Mother Teresa Home for Infant Children in northwest Washington, D.C., is now defunct. She said she worked tirelessly
  to "cut through all the red tape," although it appears that red tape prevented the work from continuing. According to a
  pastor at the church next door to the home's former location, the adoption ministry failed to take off because the
  Roman Catholic nuns who ran it weren't allowed to care for babies without medical personnel on site. "I'm not sure the
  legal thing that came down upon them, but they realized they needed to expend their energies in another way," said
  Maureen Freshour, who along with her husband, David, pastors Chevy Chase Baptist Church and lives nearby. Freshour
  has stayed in touch with the nuns from the Missionaries of Charity order who ran the home and said that the remaining
  three or four sisters have moved to another house in Washington, where they are ministering to the homeless."This has
  been a core issue—adoption—whether the home [Clinton] talked about survived or not," said Chuck Johnson, chief
  operating officer of the National Council for Adoption. "It's an issue she's been consistent on."During her speech on
  Thursday, Clinton reminisced about the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast when she attended as first lady and Mother
  Teresa was the speaker. The Roman Catholic nun delivered a blistering speech about abortion, saying, "Any country that
  accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want." Mother Teresa then
  called on attendees to fight abortion through adoption: "Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the
  child."The audience that day gave her a standing ovation—but President and Mrs. Clinton, both pro-abortion, did not
  stand. Afterward, Mother Teresa asked to meet with Hillary Clinton and they went to talk behind a curtain on the stage,
  sitting on folding chairs, Mother Teresa in sandals even though it was winter."She told me that she knew that we had a
  shared conviction about adoption being vastly better as a choice for unplanned or unwanted babies," Clinton related last
  Thursday. "And she asked me—or more properly, she directed me—to work with her to create a home for such babies
  here in Washington."Clinton followed through and set up a home for unwanted babies in Washington in just over a year,
  no small feat in a city that was known then for its inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy. The Mother Teresa Home for
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769834 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769834 Date: 08/31/2015
  Infant Children opened in June 1995 in the district's affluent Chevy Chase neighborhood to house eight pregnant
  mothers and their babies—but it remains unclear whether it facilitated any adoptions.I called the Missionaries of Charity
  in Washington, a worldwide Roman Catholic order established by Mother Teresa. The nun who answered the phone said
  she couldn't give her name because they aren't allowed to talk to the press. She did say, however, that the sisters who
  are in the order now were not in the order when the adoption home opened, so she wasn't sure why it closed. She
  added that the order sold the Chevy Chase house in 2002. "We work with the poor and we didn't have any work there
  because it's a rich neighborhood," she said. The sisters, she added, are now working with the homeless and those with
  AIDS in a more transitional neighborhood in the northeast section of town on Otis Street.
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769834 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769837
MetadataSubject: S CALLS ON IRAN VOTE?
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-09T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769837/C05769837.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: S calls on Iran vote?
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH©state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 9:15 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769837
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769837 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH©state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 9:15 AM
  To: H
  Subject: Fw: S calls on Iran vote?
  From: Feltman, Jeffrey D
  To: Sullivan, Jacob 3; Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Wed Jun 09 08:38:52 2010
  Subject: S calls on Iran vote?
  Hi. Realize you guys are traveling (as well as responding to my other requests!). But we're coming down to
  the wire with the Iran vote
  Jeffrey Feltman
  Assistant Secretary
  Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs
  Department of State
  202-647-7209
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769837 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769838
MetadataSubject: MOTHER TERESA
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769838/C05769838.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Mother Teresa
ExtractedFrom: PIR <preines
ExtractedCc: Huma Abedin
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:44 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769838
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: I will look into what happened to it after 2002 (LH was released 6/03, so better than 04)
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769838 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: PIR <preines
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:44 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Mother Teresa
  I will look into what happened to it after 2002 (LH was released 6/03, so better than 04)
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:42:08
  To: 'preines <preines
  Subject: Re: Mother Teresa
  Also, I wrote about it in Living History and no one said a word. Was it still open in some form in 2004?
  Original Message
  From: PIR <preines
  To: H
  Cc: Huma Abedin
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:33:21 2010
  Subject: Mother Teresa
  Just FYI on the below, from one of those crazy right "magazines" - notes that the home you referenced in your Prayer
  Breakfast remarks has since closed.
  I checked in with Lissa & Melanne, they didn't know it closed, which makes sense since it happened in 2002 after you left
  the White House.
  I made it clear that your longtime commitment to this issue - throughout your public career - is well known, and you
  remain very proud of your work with Mother Teresa in opening this home in 1995. And that your partnership is a
  success story to be emulated.
  Again, this is just FYI
  http://www.worldmag.com/webextra/16398
  ADOPTION I Hillary Clinton continues to hail an adoption home she helped open with Mother Teresa that has since
  closed its doors By Emily Belz
  WASHINGTON—An adoption ministry Secretary of State Hillary Clinton hailed as a home she helped open with Mother
  Teresa no longer handles adoptions and its phone line has been disconnected, though at last week's National Prayer
  Breakfast Clinton spent five minutes of her 30-minute speech relating the story of its opening. Last Thursday Clinton
  described Mother Teresa "beaming about what this meant for children and their futures," seemingly oblivious that the
  Mother Teresa Home for Infant Children in northwest Washington, D.C., is now defunct. She said she worked tirelessly
  to "cut through all the red tape," although it appears that red tape prevented the work from continuing. According to a
  pastor at the church next door to the home's former location, the adoption ministry failed to take off because the
  Roman Catholic nuns who ran it weren't allowed to care for babies without medical personnel on site. "I'm not sure the
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769838 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769838 Date: 08/31/2015
  legal thing that came down upon them, but they realized they needed to expend their energies in another way," said
  Maureen Freshour, who along with her husband, David, pastors Chevy Chase Baptist Church and lives nearby. Freshour
  has stayed in touch with the nuns from the Missionaries of Charity order who ran the home and said that the remaining
  three or four sisters have moved to another house in Washington, where they are ministering to the homeless."This has
  been a core issue—adoption—whether the home [Clinton] talked about survived or not," said Chuck Johnson, chief
  operating officer of the National Council for Adoption. "It's an issue she's been consistent on."During her speech on
  Thursday, Clinton reminisced about the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast when she attended as first lady and Mother
  Teresa was the speaker. The Roman Catholic nun delivered a blistering speech about abortion, saying, "Any country that
  accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what they want." Mother Teresa then
  called on attendees to fight abortion through adoption: "Please don't kill the child. I want the child. Please give me the
  child."The audience that day gave her a standing ovation—but President and Mrs. Clinton, both pro-abortion, did not
  stand. Afterward, Mother Teresa asked to meet with Hillary Clinton and they went to talk behind a curtain on the stage,
  sitting on folding chairs, Mother Teresa in sandals even though it was winter."She told me that she knew that we had a
  shared conviction about adoption being vastly better as a choice for unplanned or unwanted babies," Clinton related last
  Thursday. "And she asked me—or more properly, she directed me—to work with her to create a home for such babies
  here in Washington."Clinton followed through and set up a home for unwanted babies in Washington in just over a year,
  no small feat in a city that was known then for its inefficient and corrupt bureaucracy. The Mother Teresa Home for
  Infant Children opened in June 1995 in the district's affluent Chevy Chase neighborhood to house eight pregnant
  mothers and their babies—but it remains unclear whether it facilitated any adoptions.I called the Missionaries of Charity
  in Washington, a worldwide Roman Catholic order established by Mother Teresa. The nun who answered the phone said
  she couldnit give her name because they aren't allowed to talk to the press. She did say, however, that the sisters who
  are in the order now were not in the order when the adoption home opened, so she wasn't sure why it closed. She
  added that the order sold the Chevy Chase house in 2002. "We work with the poor and we didn't have any work there
  because it's a rich neighborhood," she said. The sisters, she added, are now working with the homeless and those with
  AIDS in a more transitional neighborhood in the northeast section of town on Otis Street.
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769838 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769839
MetadataSubject: MESSAGE FROM FM FOR S
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769839/C05769839.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: messsage from fm for s
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Shampaine, Nicole D; Tueller, Matthew H
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:52 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769839
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: See message below from your friend the egyptian foreign minister....
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769839 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:52 PM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: messsage from fm for s
  See message below from your friend the egyptian foreign minister....
  From: Feltman, Jeffrey D
  To: Abed in, Huma; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:34:09 2010
  Subject: Fw: messsage from fm for s
  Fun message from Aboul-Gheit!
  Jeffrey Feltman
  From: Scobey, Margaret
  To: Feltman, Jeffrey D; Schlicher, Ronald L; Connelly, Maura
  Cc: Shampaine, Nicole D; Tueller, Matthew H
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:31:08 2010
  Subject: messsage from fm, for s
  Sensitive but not classified
  Jeff:
  While speaking on phone today with FM regarding upcoming VIP travel to Egypt, he asked that I convey to the Secretary
  that he is "amazed". ..tell the Secretary that "Ahmed is amazed" that she is going to Qatar and the Kingdom and flying
  right over Egypt. I pointed out that S has been here twice and that they just met in the US last month.. .but he was
  having none of it. .."just tell her 'Ahmed is amazed' that she would not stop here."
  May I ask that you find way to convey this to S appropriately?
  He also asked for detailed info on measures to be taken at our points of entry for incoming travelers—key ministers very
  upset at what they have heard, that there will be "no exceptions." We'll work with consular to convey the correct info
  and try to calm this issue.
  Cheers, margaret
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769839 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769841
MetadataSubject: NEW MEXICO
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769841/C05769841.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: New Mexico
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:02 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769841
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: fyi
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769841 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:02 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: New Mexico
  fyi
  From: Kennedy, Patrick F
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 3:53 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: New Mexico
  Cheryl
  Spoke to him
  Feels pressdre to do something
  Made it clear that now was not the time — would potentially work against
  Said he could tell the families that he had spoken to me and that State Department was working this issue as it
  concerned about any AmCit world-wide who is in custody
  He agreed to hold off for a while
  And I promised to keep in touch
  [he remembered me from previous time at State so that may have helped a bit]
  Regards
  pat
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769841 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769842
MetadataSubject: FYI - STEINBERG IS ON THE CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769842/C05769842.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fyi - steinberg is on the call.
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:09 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769842
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769842 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:09 PM
  To: H
  Subject: Fyi - steinberg is on the call.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769842 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769843
MetadataSubject: PLS CLEAR: CONGRADULATIONS TO PRESIDENT-ELECT AQUINO OF THE PHILIPPINES
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-09T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769843/C05769843.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Pls Clear: Congratulations to President-Elect Aquino of the Philippines
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 10:56 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769843
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769843 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, June 9, 2010 10:56 AM
  To:
  Subject Fw: Pls Clear: Congratulations to President-Elect Aquino of the Philippines
  Fyi
  From: Schwerin, Daniel B
  To: Sullivan, Jacob 3; Reines, Philippe I; Fuchs, Michael H; Adler, Caroline E
  Sent: Wed Jun 09 10:49:37 2010
  Subject: Pls Clear: Congratulations to President-Elect Aquino of the Philippines
  This would be released after the WH does their statement.
  STATEMENT BY THE SECRETARY
  Congratulations to President-Elect Aquino of the Philippines
  I join President Obama in congratulating President-elect Benigno "Noynoy" Aquino III, whom the Filipino
  people have chosen to lead their nation. The Philippines' successful election exemplified the vitality of the
  country's democratic institutions and should be a point of pride for Filipinos everywhere. The Filipino people
  now look to President-elect Aquino to carry forward the democratic traditions that his parents did so much to
  champion. The United States has long stood with the Philippines as a trusted ally and friend and we will
  continue to support the ongoing efforts of the Filipino people to build a secure and prosperous country.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769843 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769843 Date: 08/31/2015
  Drafted: K Burgwinkle
  Approved: EAP/FO DAS Marciel ok
  Cleared: EAP/MTS: J Yun ok
  EAP/MTS: P Richhart ok
  D(S): P Park ok
  P: L Rosenberger ok
  SIP: J Wright ok
  EAP/P: K McKellogg ok
  NSC: D Walton ok
  PA:
  S:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769843 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769844
MetadataSubject: I BELIEVE JIM IS ON CALL - - NOT CERTAIN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769844/C05769844.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: I believe Jim is on call -- not certain
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:11 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769844
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: I
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769844 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:11 PM
  To: H
  Subject: I believe Jim is on call -- not certain
  I
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769844 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769845
MetadataSubject: CALLING U ON 3RD FLOOR PHONE WITH DENNIS ROSS AS YOU REQUESTED
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769845/C05769845.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:40 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769845
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769845 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 4:40 PM
  To:
  Subject Calling u on 3rd floor phone with dennis ross as you requested
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769845 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769846
MetadataSubject: MURTHA FUNERAL UPDATE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Verma, Richard R
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769846/C05769846.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
ExtractedTo: H; Abed in, Huma
ExtractedFrom: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR©state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:11 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769846
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: More details...
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769846 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR©state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:11 PM
  To: H; Abed in, Huma
  Subject Fw: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
  More details...
  From: Patrick Justin Alwine
  To: Verma, Richard R
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:17:50 2010
  Subject: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
  -- Original Message ---
  From: Mazonkey, Matthew
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:48:55 2010
  Subject: Murtha Funeral Update
  The Murtha Family has announced further details regarding funeral services for the late Congressman John P. MUrtha -
  A public viewing will take place at Duca Funeral Home from 3:00-7:00 p.m. on Sunday, February 14, 2010, and Monday, February
  15, 2010. The funeral home is located at 1622 Menoher Boulevard in Johnstown, PA.
  A private funeral service will be held at the Westmont Presbyterian Church at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February 16, 2010. The church
  is located at 601 Luzeme Street in Johnstown, PA. A private internment will follow at Grandview Cemetery, also in Johnstown.
  The family is also working with the Office of the Speaker of the House to hold a public memorial in the U.S. Capitol in the coming
  weeks. Details will be forthcoming. An official Congressional Delegation is also expected to be present for the private funeral
  service on Tuesday.
  In lieu of flowers, the Murtha family suggests contributions be made to the UPMC John P. Murtha Cancer Pavilion (337 Somerset
  Street, Johnstown, PA 15901) or the Joyce Murtha Breast Care Center (600 Somerset Avenue, Windber, PA 15963).
  Further details about media coverage will be forthcoming.
  Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769846 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769848
MetadataSubject: MURTHA FUNERAL UPDATE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Verma, Richard R
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769848/C05769848.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
ExtractedFrom: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:42 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769848
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: I suspect they want him in Johnstown, but I will double check.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769848 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 5:42 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
  I suspect they want him in Johnstown, but I will double check.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Verma, Richard R
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 17:21:17 2010
  Subject: Re: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
  Does this mean Bill should not plan on going and we just wait for the public memorial service?
  Original Message
  From: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
  To: H; Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 17:10:48 2010
  Subject: Fw: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
  More details...
  From: Patrick Justin Alwine
  To: Verma, Richard R
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 15:17:50 2010
  Subject: Fwd: Murtha Funeral Update
  Original Message
  From: Mazonkey, Matthew
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 14:48:55 2010
  Subject: Murtha Funeral Update
  The Murtha Family has announced further details regarding funeral services for the late Congressman John P. Murtha -
  A public vievtring will take place at Duca Funeral Home from 3:00-7:00 p.m. on Sunday, February 14, 2010, and Monday,
  February 15,1 2010. The funeral home is located at 1622 Menoher Boulevard in Johnstown, PA.
  A private funeral service will be held at the Westmont Presbyterian Church at 11:00 a.m. on Tuesday, February 16, 2010.
  The church is located at 601 Luzerne Street in Johnstown, PA. A private internment will follow at Grandview Cemetery,
  also in Johnstown.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769848 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769848 Date: 08/31/2015
  The family is also working with the Office of the Speaker of the House to hold a public memorial in the U.S. Capitol in the
  coming weeks. Details will be forthcoming. An official Congressional Delegation is also expected to be present for the
  private funeral service on Tuesday.
  In lieu of flowers, the Murtha family suggests contributions be made to the UPMC John P. Murtha Cancer Pavilion (337
  Somerset Street, Johnstown, PA 15901) or the Joyce Murtha Breast Care Center (600 Somerset Avenue, Windber, PA
  15963).
  Further details about media coverage will be forthcoming.
  Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769848 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769849
MetadataSubject: CALLS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769849/C05769849.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Calls
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 6:03 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769849
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Will do
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769849 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 6:03 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Calls
  Will do
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Jiloty, Lauren C
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 17:55:25 2010
  Subject: Calls
  I called and talked w INR DAS Jim Buchanan at John Dinger's request. Pls let John know.
  I called Marty Edelman and LM.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769849 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769852
MetadataSubject: S SAW REPORTS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-02-10T05:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0064/DOC_0C05769852/C05769852.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: S saw reports
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Sullivan, Jacob J
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 7:44 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769852
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Checking
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769852 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, February 10, 2010 7:44 PM
  To:
  Cc: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Subject Fw: S saw reports
  Checking
  Original Message
  From: Mills, Cheryl D
  To: Merten, Kenneth H; Lindwall, David E
  Cc: Kennedy, Patrick F; Mills, Cheryl D; Moore, Donald L; Mills, Cheryl D
  Sent: Wed Feb 10 19:43:27 2010
  Subject: S saw reports
  Saying they we being released - not sure that is accurate - do you have an update?
  Cdm
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769852 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769861
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) RUSSIA SAYS IRAN SANCTIONS DO NOT BAR MISSLE DEAL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-10T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769861/C05769861.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: (Reuters) Russia says Iran sanctions do not bar missile deal
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-II
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, June 10, 20108:40 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769861
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769861 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, June 10, 20108:40 AM
  To: H
  Subject Fw: (Reuters) Russia says Iran sanctions do not bar missile deal
  From: Pearce, Jennifer
  To: NEWS-Mahogany; NEWS-EUR; NEWS-NEA
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-II
  Sent: Thu Jun 10 08:15:48 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Russia says Iran sanctions do not bar missile deal
  MOSCOW —The Foreign Ministry said the new UN sanctions against Tehran over its nuclear program do not oblige
  Moscow to scrap a controversial deal to deliver surface-to-air missiles to Iran. Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko
  spoke after the Interfax news agency cited a Russian arms industry source as saying Russia would freeze its unfulfilled
  contract to sell S-300 missiles to Iran because of the sanctions.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769861 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769863
MetadataSubject: EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-10T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769863/C05769863.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: European Parliament
ExtractedFrom: Abedin,,Huma <AbedinH@state.goy>
ExtractedCc: McEldowney, Nancy E; Jones, Stuart; Sommers, Scott E; Slaughter, Anne-Marie
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 12:40 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769863
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769863 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  ■ •11111
  From: Abedin,,Huma <AbedinH@state.goy>
  Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 12:40 PM
  To:
  Subject Fw: European Parliament
  Fyi
  From: Kennard, William E
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Abedin, Huma
  Cc: McEldowney, Nancy E; Jones, Stuart; Sommers, Scott E; Slaughter, Anne-Marie
  Sent: Thu Jun 10 12:17:26 2010
  Subject: European Parliament
  Dear Madam Secretary:
  I greatly appreciate your support of our efforts to improve USG outreach to the European Parliament (EP) and
  wanted to provide you with a brief update on our progress. We have worked very hard at USEU to deepen and
  intensify our relationship with the EP over the past several months. Specifically, we have,
  (1) Increased the flow of high-level USG visitors to the EP. Recent visitors include Janet Napolitano, Dick
  Holbrooke, George Mitchell, Dick Morningstar and Ron Kirk. These visits culminated last month in a
  highly successful address by VP Biden to a Plenary Session of the EP. I hope that you will also address
  a Plenary Session of the EP in the near term. (Your town hall meeting at the EP with young leaders last
  year was well-received here.)
  (2) Increased the flow and quality of EP interactions in Washington. We have facilitated a dramatic
  increase in the number of EP delegations visiting Washington and a significant improvement in the level
  of their access to high-level USG officials.
  (3) Increased USEU outreach to the EP at every level. At the Mission, we are restructuring the way in
  which we interact with EP leaders by institutionalizing responsibility for key relationships and
  enhancing accountability. In the coming months, we expect to receive two additional FTEs at the
  Mission to improve our ability to cover the EP. We have also encouraged our Embassies in member
  State capitals to meet with European Parliament members.
  Again, thank you for your interest and support for our efforts.
  Bill Kennard
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769863 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769863 Date: 08/31/2015
  SBU
  This email is UNCLASSIFIED.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769863 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769865
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Verma, Richard R
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-10T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769865/C05769865.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 10:13 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769865
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Welcome back. I sent to your house a small binder of material in preparation for the Dodd/Berman meeting tomorrow
  morning. I am happy to walk you through any part of it or answer any questions tonight or first thing in the morning.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769865 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 10:13 PM
  To: H
  Welcome back. I sent to your house a small binder of material in preparation for the Dodd/Berman meeting tomorrow
  morning. I am happy to walk you through any part of it or answer any questions tonight or first thing in the morning.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769865 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769870
MetadataSubject: RICH WANTS TO TALK BEFORE U SEE DODD/BERMAN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-11T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769870/C05769870.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, June 11, 2010 8:04 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769870
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769870 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 8:04 AM
  To:
  Subject Rich wants to talk before u see dodd/berman
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769870 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769873
MetadataSubject: CULTURAL DIPLOMACY AT NMAA!
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-11T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769873/C05769873.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Cultural diplomacy at NMAA!
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, June 11, 2010 2:32 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769873
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: FYI
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769873 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 2:32 PM
  To:
  Subject FW: Cultural diplomacy at NMAA!
  FYI
  From: Pally, Maura M.
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 2:16 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D; Toiv, Nora "F
  Subject: FW: Cultural diplomacy at NMAA!
  Everyone is excited!
  From: Cole, Johnnetta [mailto
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 1.
  To: Pally, Maura M.; Henri, Anita
  Subject: RE: Cultural diplomacy at NMAA!
  Dear Deputy Assistant Secretary Pally,
  My colleague, Anita Henri, and I enjoyed the rich conversation we had with you and Ms. Cheryl Mills as we explored
  ways that the Smithsonian National Museum of African Art can partner with the State Department in the area of cultural
  diplomacy.
  We look forward to working with you. And of course it is with great anticipation that we await news on the idea of the
  Secretary delivering a cultural diplomacy speech at our museum.
  Best regards,
  Johnnetta Betsch Cole
  From: Pally, Maura M. [mailto:PallyMM©state.gov]
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 11:47 AM
  To: Cole, Johnnetta; Henri, Anita
  Subject: Cultural diplomacy at NMAA!
  It was wonderful to meet you both this morning. I am so pleased to know we have such a wonderful resource to draw
  upon. I am going to share Anita's contact info with some people here whom I hope can use you as resources so you
  should expect to hear from them.
  I am also thrilled with the idea of the Secretary delivering a cultural diplomacy speech at the National Museum of
  African Art! I could not think of a better place for her to deliver that important message.
  In the mean time please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.
  Best,
  Maura Pally
  Deputy Assistant Secretary
  Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769873 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769874
MetadataSubject: A CLARIFICATION ON TURKEY/BRAZIL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-11T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769874/C05769874.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769874
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA©state.gov>
  Friday, June 11, 2010 4:05 PM
  Sullivan, Jacob J; Mills, Cheryl D
  A clarification on Turkey/Brazil
  AM

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769874 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA©state.gov>
  Friday, June 11, 2010 4:05 PM
  Sullivan, Jacob J; Mills, Cheryl D
  A clarification on Turkey/Brazil
  AM
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769874 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769875
MetadataSubject: FT
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Philippe, Reines
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-11T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769875/C05769875.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FT
ExtractedFrom: Philippe Reines < B6
ExtractedCc: CDM; Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, June 11, 2010 7:44 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769875
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Our clips service doesn't have the license necessary to provide FT (or Reuters) content, so here's the long awaited FT
  profile -you'll be especially interested in the guest column David Milliband wrote:
  An FT interview with Hillary Clinton
  By Daniel Dombey
  FT
  June 11 2010 22:21
  This is what it is like to be Hillary Clinton. The motorcade, twisting and skidding through rain-splashed
  streets for more than an hour; the public meetings and camera lights at journey's end; the spotlight that
  has not let up for two decades. It is almost as if the 2008 US presidential election - hailed as the most
  exciting for a generation - had never ended.
  But this is a campaign without a vote. Today, Clinton's convoy is snaking through Sao Paulo, Brazil, not
  South Hampton, New Hampshire. She herself is no longer an aspirant for the White House, despite what
  the overnight flights, town hall meetings and strategy sessions that make up her gruelling schedule might
  suggest. Instead, she is in Latin America to shore up relations with the region and promote a new idea of
  US leadership, one very much built around herself.
  She's had bigger and more ecstatic audiences than the 700-odd students and staff crammed into the hall
  tonight at Zumbi dos Pradares, an Afro-Brazilian university, but she's still greeted by a wave of raised
  arms as the audience snaps away at her with their mobile phones.
  In the convoy moments before, she was wrapped in a shawl, suffering from a cold and angry at the delays
  that pushed us into the side streets speckled with box-like bars, warehouses and love hotels while
  Brazilian motorists sought to cut into our path. There is no sign of that now. With the metabolism of a
  born politician, she feeds off the energy of her audience and takes questions from students, teachers and
  local celebrities for an hour. Hillary Clinton never looks happier than when she is centre stage.
  Most US secretaries of state wouldn't bother with this sort of event, much less initiate it and arrange for it
  to be screened on the biggest local channel. Yet this is what Clinton does on almost every foreign trip -
  and she seems to spend half her life on her official 727, crammed with long-time aides and armed
  bodyguards. The schedule is backbreaking and constantly shifting. She has notched up more than a
  quarter of a million miles since taking office.
  On this Latin America trip, thrown into confusion by an earthquake in Chile, we have already visited four
  countries in 24 hours. We go to tiny Uruguay, where our stay is so brief we check into a hotel just for a
  shower; Argentina, where we spend almost all our time at the presidential palace; Chile itself, where we
  don't leave the airport; and Brazil, where we spend almost a full day.
  So what exactly is Clinton trying to do on this never-ending world tour? Travelling with her for a week,
  talking to people inside and outside the administration, I tried to find out.
  "We now have a case to make and it is not just a case that is made to the president or the prime minister
  or the foreign minister or an ambassador," she tells me a few weeks later, as she perches on a sofa in her
  expansive office, with its view of the Lincoln Memorial. "People now have a voice and an opinion and a
  vote in many instances on the direction that their own societies take ... I want to model a different kind of
  leadership that is open and willing to listen but [also] to stand our ground if necessary."
  She argues that these trips of hers help to restore the US's image in the wake of the Bush administration
  - by making contact with public opinion abroad, and so boosting American power. Her aides say that, as a
  battle-hardened politician who also happens to be one of the most famous women in the world, she is
  ideally placed to carry out the task. But the deeper question is whether she is merely implementing the
  foreign policy crafted by Barack Obama, her boss and former rival, or whether her role - and ambitions -
  go beyond that.
  Is she a kind of saleswoman-in-chief for the US, I ask? "Well, I think that is part of the job," she replies,
  toying with the napkin underneath her glass of water. "If you are making a case for American values and
  for American leadership, you have to make it where people now get information ... Given the bridges we
  had to build and some of the repair work we had to do, we had to travel."
  As in S'ao Paulo, her system is under strain - "I've been fighting this all day," she says as she masks a
  cough set off by her allergies (Washington's cherry blossom trees are shedding their flowers). Life is still
  hectic - the volcanic ash cloud has just all but paralysed Europe and televisions throughout the State
  Department are showing the first British election debate. But Clinton remains enthusiastic, affable and
  unhurried, her speech peppered with exclamations such as "oh my gosh", even as she discusses issues of
  state. She politely asks if I have any updates for her about Europe's airspace shutdown and tells me she's
  been talking to Norway's foreign minister about it.
  "He said that this dust gets into engines of any size, even Air Force One - it's chunky! I don't know how
  else to describe it," she says, an odd note of hilarity entering her voice as she pronounces the word
  "chunky".
  Clinton often speaks in this eager, unvarnished way - a world away from the clipped, on-message manner
  of her immediate predecessor in the post, Condoleezza Rice. If anything, she is an undiplomat - known
  less for calibrated circumlocutions than for her plain speaking and sometimes her gaffes, a woman who
  retains both a formidable political constituency and a laugh she once admitted can send cats scurrying
  from a room.
  Her staff point out she is only the third elected politician in 60 years to have served as secretary of state,
  and the first to come from outside the foreign policy establishment since James Baker, George H.W.
  Bush's right-hand man and perhaps her most illustrious recent predecessor. She may be the most
  substantive politician in the office since William Jennings Bryan, the three-time presidential candidate who
  served as secretary almost a century ago. "Her stature on the world stage, her almost presidential
  stature, has set her apart," Bill Burns, the top career diplomat at the State Department, tells me. "Leaders
  want to meet her. And the town hall meetings do make a difference with public opinion."
  State visitor Hillary Clinton is greeted by Air Force Base Commander Colonel Celso de Araujo at S'ao Paulo
  airport in March
  Back in Sao Paulo, the meeting at the university ranges far from the confines and dramatis personae of
  traditional diplomacy. Annie, a young woman with red and blue dreadlocked hair, tells Clinton about her
  dance and percussion classes and asks how to study in the US without paying college fees. A nervous
  young man confesses himself lost halfway through an abstruse question about tariff policy; Clinton,
  smiling and nodding in that vaguely automatic way of hers, bears with him all the same. Another female
  student asks for an autograph. When answering, Clinton sometimes opens her eyes wide as she
  emphasises a phrase; at other moments, seemingly at random, she pulls her hands apart as if
  demonstrating the size of a fish.
  Then a law student called Marina asks about abortion - which is illegal in Brazil - and Clinton moves into
  treacherous terrain. She speaks of the Brazilian hospital she visited in the 1990s that treated not just
  expectant mothers but women suffering from the consequences of backstreet abortions. "Wealthy women
  have rights in every country," she says. "And poor women don't." Her strength of feeling can't be hidden
  as she denounces "the great toll that illegal abortions take and the denial of women being able to exercise
  such a fundamental personal right".
  Tom Shannon, the US ambassador to Brazil, tells me later: "I understand the possible concern that we
  might have come close to domestic issues. But she wasn't laying out a prescription for Brazil. She was
  sharing her experience as a woman in American politics and as secretary of state." It's true: Clinton
  doesn't quite cross the line. Onstage, she is controlled without seeming artificial, convivial without
  appearing over-effusive, what a previous age would call a real trouper. At the podium she looks straight
  ahead, her lips carefully expressionless. Still, the old competitive instincts haven't left her. Perhaps it is
  the lecterns at press conferences, reminiscent of the Democratic presidential debates, but on exiting the
  podium at a joint appearance with Argentina's president Cristina Fernandez, Clinton makes clear her
  satisfaction at having had the last word. The expert debater who usually bested Obama has not left the
  stage.
  Yet that competitive urge coexists with what one insider describes as her "almost inhuman loyalty"
  towards Obama. Her mastery of the facts - an "information carnivore" one of her officials calls her -
  comes despite the consensus in much of Washington that her role consists largely of implementing the
  foreign policy Obama and his inner circle have framed, rather than helping frame it herself.
  In Sao Paulo, she shows her loyalty in striking fashion when she is asked repeatedly about positive
  discrimination - another sensitive topic in Brazil - not least because, Clinton herself observes, Afro-
  Brazilians account for more than half the country's population but only 2 per cent of university students.
  "That suggests to me that some special steps need to be taken [in] recruiting and admitting students so
  that they can have a chance to succeed," she tells the hall, again inching towards domestic politics, before
  speaking of her pride in the progress the US civil rights movement has made in the past half-century. She
  says: "The election of Barack Obama, many believe, was the greatest accomplishment of all because it
  demonstrated that an African-American could be elected president of the United States."
  Among the crowd, I catch my breath and scribble down her words. It's hard to think of a more fulsome
  statement from the woman who fought so hard against Obama - and who squandered a huge poll lead
  and millions of dollars in the struggle against him.
  The great collaborator Clinton has established strong working relationships within the Obama
  administration
  When I ask Clinton later about how she managed to move from the antagonism of the primary race to the
  obedience of office, she dismisses my question with an anodyne "that's politics". She adds: "We're
  working really hard and well together ... It just never comes up any more, it seems like ancient history to
  me." Not so ancient, I think, that she is willing to admit the failings of her campaign. "I always run
  inclusive and successful organisations," she retorts when I ask her whether she'd applied any lessons from
  that searing experience to her new post.
  She admits she didn't want the job at State - she says she was exhausted by the election and missed the
  Senate -. "but at the end of the day, I'm pretty old-fashioned and if the president asks you to do
  something, you'd better have a really good reason why you can't." Also, she adds: "Suppose I had won
  and I were asking him to be in my cabinet ... I would have wanted him to say yes."
  Others say the relationship is more complex, that by dint of her loyalty and unflagging hard work, Clinton
  has moved closer to the charmed circle and made herself an even more formidable political force than
  before. "Quite simply, she gives good advice and the president over a year and a half has recognised
  that," says Anne-Marie Slaughter, head of the State Department policy planning unit. "The relationship is
  based on her performance in the job."
  By all accounts, it's a collaborative partnership, though not perhaps a warm one. Clinton boasts a good
  working relationship with the main players of the administration - and has formed something of an
  alliance with defence secretary Robert Gates, although on life-and-death issues such as Afghanistan, it is
  Gates, not her, who has taken the lead. As one official told me, secretaries of state have often either been
  popular with their own department - Colin Powell comes to mind - or with the rest of the administration -
  as was Condoleezza Rice - but Clinton has managed to be both.
  In truth, Clinton's language remains harder-edged than Obama's - she recently claimed that Iran's
  Revolutionary Guard had staged a slow-motion coup - and she has sometimes been more willing than he
  is to hint at using the military. "She seems to step up with a bit of spine just at the right time," says Kurt
  Volker, a US ambassador to Nato under George W. Bush.
  She has also assumed an ever more prominent role in talking to leaders such as Benjamin Netanyahu of
  Israel and Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan - apparently because she is trusted both by them and Obama.
  Meanwhile, she has been careful to keep her husband, the former US president, in the background. Aides
  say they have barely seen him in the building - though Clinton herself says that behind the scenes Bill
  Clinton gives her strategic advice. "One of his favourite sayings, that I remind myself of all the time, is a
  kind of baseball saying," she says: "Don't major in the minors; keep your eye on not just the headlines
  but the trend lines."
  It is her co-operative stance rather than any notable effort to set out a grand vision of her own that is the
  chief theme of her time so far at State. When I ask Clinton to name her proudest achievement in office,
  she replies "the effective and collaborative approach that this administration has taken towards identifying
  and solving problems." A more process-oriented, less provocative answer would be hard to imagine.
  But maybe, I think, the US has less scope for grand strategy than it did in the past couple of decades,
  when the country seemed to bestride the world colossus-style. Clinton herself suggests that so formidable
  are the tasks confronting the US that the administration has little scope to enter into internecine fights but
  needs instead to focus on the challenges to hand. Whatever the reason for her stance, it seems to be a
  smart decision - by all accounts she's overcome many of the suspicions the White House retinue had
  towards her.
  "It's fair to say that she was not born into the administration's inner circle but slowly but surely, for the
  most consequential decisions, she now has a prime seat at the table," says one official. Praising what he
  calls her "Terminator-quality durability and determination," he adds: "She's done an amazing amount of
  work, judging that the way to build a strategic vision is bottom up, by mastering the details."
  Indeed, Clinton's ability to master the most arcane foreign policy briefs is the marvel of her building. She
  has dropped into obscure working groups and shown an unnerving knowledge of their details. At her
  confirmation hearings last year she exchanged facts about the arctic with an Alaskan senator; at the
  meeting in So Paulo she becomes enthused about freight transport policy both in Brazil and the US. She
  herself acknowledges that finding her feet on foreign policy was something of a struggle, despite her
  campaign claims of expertise in the field. "It was so intellectually challenging, just to get our arms around
  all of these issues," she says. During her first year, she was criticised for apparent gaffes - including the
  way she called for Israel to halt all building of settlements on occupied territory only to hail a partial freeze
  a few months later as unprecedented. On an election campaign, she says, "you may be in a different city
  four times a day but you have a message you're trying to deliver that is repetitive and aimed at your
  audience. But here you might deal with 10 different countries' problems, six different regional or global
  challenges in the course of a day."
  As the Latin America tour shows, she is now trying to do both - travel incessantly and solve an array of
  international issues. She is at the forefront of the US's efforts to consolidate relations with a number of
  important countries - predominantly Russia and China, but also rising powers such as Brazil, Turkey,
  Indonesia and South Africa - and to cool down anti-American feeling in hotspots, notably Pakistan. She
  says the push is working, hailing a "change in public opinion in places that were pretty negative about the
  US" - a reference to Russia and Pakistan. But it is far from smooth sailing. Differences about Iran and
  over Israel's raid on aid-bearing ships off Gaza have stoked tensions with Turkey and Brazil recently, amid
  questioning of the effectiveness of the Obama administration's policies.
  During my time with her on the road, the stop in Brazil is the focal point - not surprising given the
  country's increased profile as Latin America leader. Clinton is now heading the administration's push to
  secure sanctions on Iran, and in Brasilia she tries and fails to win President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to her
  cause. She employs an almost combative tone at a press conference with Celso Amorim, Brazil's foreign
  minister. At moments she appears to barely contain her irritation, as she denounces "an Iran that runs to
  Brazil" as well as other countries such as Turkey and China "telling different things to different people to
  avoid international sanctions". Amorim is spiky in his own way - drawing parallels to the 1990s sanctions
  on Iraq and the claims about weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 war. "Of course, I don't agree
  with everything the Secretary said," he says.
  It is not a happy experience - indeed this past week both Brazil and Turkey voted against sanctions at the
  United Nations - yet Hillary Clinton is nowhere near giving up. Years ago, one of Bill Clinton's biographers
  described his approach to government as a "permanent campaign", and it appears to be his wife's
  preferred form of existence as well. If there is one constant in Clinton's life, it is that she never throws in
  her cards, whether what motivates her is power or public service.
  "Never, never!" she exclaims, when I ask whether she ever thought of walking off into the wings after the
  frustrations and indignities of her time at the White House. "I have a very realistic sense of what high-
  stakes politics requires and it took me a while to get there because it's shocking when you are in the
  arena ... but once you figure it out, you can take it seriously for purposes of analysis and understanding,
  but you can't take it personally." Such treatment seems to rankle all the same. She's been listening to
  coverage ahead of the British debate and is plainly irritated by the coverage of the leaders' wives.
  "Whether a woman's running for office or she's supporting her husband who's running for office and she
  gets criticised for wearing open-toed shoes or for the colour of her coat, there's just a lot of history that
  you bear if you are a woman who puts herself out in the political arena," she says.
  Another country Clinton boards her official 727 to fly from Sao Paulo to Costa Rica
  Injustice towards women appears to be the issue that most enthuses Clinton in this job - as in her many
  other incarnations in American public life, whether as First Lady or before. "I feel passionately it is in not
  just the American national security interests but the world's, that women be given the opportunities and
  the tools to make the most out of their own lives," she says.
  In the 1990s she steered clear of reading the newspapers because of the way she was treated. Today, she
  says, "I certainly don't read coverage of me, I read what else is going on that I need to know about to do
  my job." "It's all baloney," says Philippe Reines, her press adviser, who set up the meeting with her and is
  sitting to one side in her office.
  "Yeah, yeah, right, that's what he tells me," Clinton responds.
  I wonder. She may not read the stories about her, but she has boosted her domestic profile still further by
  talking to American magazines such as Esquire, Vogue and Parade. To what end? Clinton has said she will
  only serve one four-year term as secretary of state - understandable, given the grind of the job. When I
  ask whether she expects a woman president in the next decade or so, she responds: "I'd love that,
  obviously I would love that. I want to be front and centre when it happens."
  "Any chance it would be you?" I ask.
  "No, no, I don't think that's in the cards," Clinton says. She's given more categoric denials in the past. "I
  think that there's a whole generation of young women and not so young, but mature, seasoned women
  who are earning their stripes and recognising how tough it is out there. It is not for the faint of heart to
  run for president, and I believe it is harder for women, it just is, and that's just a fact." But, says one US
  official, "all the profiles and all this media treatment undercut the argument that she is finished with
  electoral politics. Why do all this stuff? She's already Hillary Clinton. You have to ask: 'What's the idea
  behind raising her domestic profile still further?"
  Indeed she is now, by some counts, the most popular politician in America and some in Washington say
  she could be a good fit for the vice-presidential slot in the 2012 elections.
  Back in Sao Paulo, once the town hall meeting is over, Clinton faces a seven-hour flight to Costa Rica. The
  journey goes on and on, and as saleswoman-in-chief for the US in an unruly world, she faces a long, hard
  road. Today the US sometimes struggles to assert itself on the world stage. But the obstacles are rather
  fewer if the product she is pitching is herself. A secretary of state like none before her, Hillary Clinton,
  long one of the most formidable figures in US politics, is looking stronger than ever.
  Daniel Dombey is the FT's US diplomatic correspondent
  David Miliband: "Hillary is a rock star ... she has a great sense of fun, and a great sense of humour"
  It's too early to start chalking up a scorecard because Hillary Clinton, and the Obama administration, is
  laying the foundations for long-term change in America's foreign policy. The challenges are immense -
  probably more difficult than the inheritance of any previous administration. But American leadership is
  essential and a commitment to multilateralism - in fact multi, multilateralism using different and
  overlapping forums - is real and right.
  You also have to remember that Hillary is a rock star. When I arrived at the Nato Foreign Ministers
  meeting in March 2009, it was a nice surprise that all the staff, never mind the press, seemed to have
  turned out in droves for my arrival. Then I realised that Hillary was 10 minutes behind me.
  That said, the thing that most surprised me about working with Clinton was not her intelligence or her
  hard work, all of which are well known, but that behind the serious exterior is someone who has a great
  sense of fun, and a great sense of humour. She has seen politics from all sides, and can laugh at herself
  as well as at others.
  She's a remarkably good listener, always synthesising ideas and opinions to develop her own. She thinks
  strategically as well as tactically. She's also very, very unpompous. Hillary is a very political person but in
  a particular way, she honours politics and public service and believes that democratic politics is not a
  necessary evil, but a calling of value and vocation. She knows you win some and you lose some, but it's
  essential to take part.
  There's one other thing. Hillary is a people person in that she thinks deeply about the psychology of the
  people she's dealing with. Their motivation, their loyalties, their culture. It's real emotional intelligence in
  trying to understand why people disagree and how you can get them to agree. I think that must be why
  so many other members of the administration say she is a very good colleague.
  David Miliband is shadow foreign secretary
  Gideon Rachman: "Relations between the White House and the State Department are not particularly
  close"
  A school teacher asked to write a report on Hillary Clinton's stint as secretary of state would have to give
  her 10/10 for effort but a rather more modest mark for actual achievements - maybe a six or a seven.
  Secretaries of state are generally judged on two criteria. First, how have they done in the endless
  bureaucratic turf wars that characterise Washington politics? Second, how effective have they been in
  promoting US foreign policy in the wider world? Success in one area usually helps in the other. Henry
  Kissinger was a superb Washington infighter - and his close relationship with President Nixon made him
  all the more effective overseas. Colin Powell, George W. Bush's first secretary of state, was widely
  admired outside the US - but came out on the wrong side of many of the Washington battles, which
  limited his ability to get things done in the wider world.
  Hillary Clinton has skilfully avoided being sucked into the debilitating Washington struggles that so
  damaged Powell. Despite the often poisonous rivalry between the Obama and Clinton camps during the
  campaign, Clinton has a good working relationship with the president. But while relations between the
  White House and the State Department are cordial, they do not seem to be particularly close. Clinton
  appointed many loyalists from her own campaign to the State Department, with the result that State is
  rather detached from Obama's inner circle. Obama's penchant for making high-profile speeches in foreign
  capitals such as Cairo, Prague, Tokyo and Istanbul means that the president himself has done more than
  anyone else to define his administration's approach to the world.
  That still leaves a role for Clinton to fill in the crucial details of policy. But special representatives have
  been appointed to deal with Afghanistan and the Middle East - and the Treasury is critical to China policy.
  Asked about Clinton's impact as secretary of state, one senior European policymaker purses his lips and
  says: "She's done some great trips, and she's highly professional. But it's hard to see any particular area
  where she has really driven policy."
  Gideon Rachman is the FT's chief foreign affairs columnist
  David Rothkopf: "When she has been asked to deliver tough messages, she has done so unflinchingly"
  Hillary Clinton has been a cautious secretary of state: she has protected the president well and pursued
  his agenda without upstaging him - an early concern, given her stature. She has worked very well with
  other members of the cabinet, and is reconsidering the role and structure of the State Department.
  That includes a review of the role of diplomacy going forward. Clinton has not only acknowledged the rise
  of new powers and a changing global power structure but has taken steps to reshape US foreign policy
  structure accordingly. An important part of that has been recognising the importance of co-operating with
  private and non-state actors such as NG0s, as well as dealing with non-state threats.
  When the administration has called upon her to deliver tough messages, she has done so unflinchingly.
  This has allowed the president to articulate a strategic vision which Clinton then goes about implementing.
  Still, neither the secretary of state nor the president determines the global situation. The US may be the
  most powerful country in the world but it is one among many powerful countries, and many aspects of the
  situation we face today are beyond our control. The Obama administration has been dealt an extremely
  difficult hand: not only Iraq and Afghanistan, but Iran and North Korea's nuclear programmes, the rise of
  emerging powers and a complex and still unfolding series of financial crises.
  We have gone from a world in which the US thought it had limitless resources and unbounded options to
  one where the limits are clear; from a world in which you could work in the GB to one where you have to
  work in the context of the G20; a world where new technologies and new powers play a bigger role. All of
  those things would dictate a change in foreign policy regardless of who is in office.
  Hillary Clinton has established a very solid foundation. The next step is to identify a couple of signature
  issues - and have a couple of signature successes. That will take her to the next level.
  David Rothkopf is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace with expertise in
  national security

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: Philippe Reines < B6
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 7:44 PM
  To:
  Cc: CDM; Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
  Subject: FT
  Our clips service doesn't have the license necessary to provide FT (or Reuters) content, so here's the long awaited FT
  profile -you'll be especially interested in the guest column David Milliband wrote:
  An FT interview with Hillary Clinton
  By Daniel Dombey
  FT
  June 11 2010 22:21
  This is what it is like to be Hillary Clinton. The motorcade, twisting and skidding through rain-splashed
  streets for more than an hour; the public meetings and camera lights at journey's end; the spotlight that
  has not let up for two decades. It is almost as if the 2008 US presidential election - hailed as the most
  exciting for a generation - had never ended.
  But this is a campaign without a vote. Today, Clinton's convoy is snaking through Sao Paulo, Brazil, not
  South Hampton, New Hampshire. She herself is no longer an aspirant for the White House, despite what
  the overnight flights, town hall meetings and strategy sessions that make up her gruelling schedule might
  suggest. Instead, she is in Latin America to shore up relations with the region and promote a new idea of
  US leadership, one very much built around herself.
  She's had bigger and more ecstatic audiences than the 700-odd students and staff crammed into the hall
  tonight at Zumbi dos Pradares, an Afro-Brazilian university, but she's still greeted by a wave of raised
  arms as the audience snaps away at her with their mobile phones.
  In the convoy moments before, she was wrapped in a shawl, suffering from a cold and angry at the delays
  that pushed us into the side streets speckled with box-like bars, warehouses and love hotels while
  Brazilian motorists sought to cut into our path. There is no sign of that now. With the metabolism of a
  born politician, she feeds off the energy of her audience and takes questions from students, teachers and
  local celebrities for an hour. Hillary Clinton never looks happier than when she is centre stage.
  Most US secretaries of state wouldn't bother with this sort of event, much less initiate it and arrange for it
  to be screened on the biggest local channel. Yet this is what Clinton does on almost every foreign trip -
  and she seems to spend half her life on her official 727, crammed with long-time aides and armed
  bodyguards. The schedule is backbreaking and constantly shifting. She has notched up more than a
  quarter of a million miles since taking office.
  On this Latin America trip, thrown into confusion by an earthquake in Chile, we have already visited four
  countries in 24 hours. We go to tiny Uruguay, where our stay is so brief we check into a hotel just for a
  shower; Argentina, where we spend almost all our time at the presidential palace; Chile itself, where we
  don't leave the airport; and Brazil, where we spend almost a full day.
  So what exactly is Clinton trying to do on this never-ending world tour? Travelling with her for a week,
  talking to people inside and outside the administration, I tried to find out.
  "We now have a case to make and it is not just a case that is made to the president or the prime minister
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  or the foreign minister or an ambassador," she tells me a few weeks later, as she perches on a sofa in her
  expansive office, with its view of the Lincoln Memorial. "People now have a voice and an opinion and a
  vote in many instances on the direction that their own societies take ... I want to model a different kind of
  leadership that is open and willing to listen but [also] to stand our ground if necessary."
  She argues that these trips of hers help to restore the US's image in the wake of the Bush administration
  - by making contact with public opinion abroad, and so boosting American power. Her aides say that, as a
  battle-hardened politician who also happens to be one of the most famous women in the world, she is
  ideally placed to carry out the task. But the deeper question is whether she is merely implementing the
  foreign policy crafted by Barack Obama, her boss and former rival, or whether her role - and ambitions -
  go beyond that.
  Is she a kind of saleswoman-in-chief for the US, I ask? "Well, I think that is part of the job," she replies,
  toying with the napkin underneath her glass of water. "If you are making a case for American values and
  for American leadership, you have to make it where people now get information ... Given the bridges we
  had to build and some of the repair work we had to do, we had to travel."
  As in S'ao Paulo, her system is under strain - "I've been fighting this all day," she says as she masks a
  cough set off by her allergies (Washington's cherry blossom trees are shedding their flowers). Life is still
  hectic - the volcanic ash cloud has just all but paralysed Europe and televisions throughout the State
  Department are showing the first British election debate. But Clinton remains enthusiastic, affable and
  unhurried, her speech peppered with exclamations such as "oh my gosh", even as she discusses issues of
  state. She politely asks if I have any updates for her about Europe's airspace shutdown and tells me she's
  been talking to Norway's foreign minister about it.
  "He said that this dust gets into engines of any size, even Air Force One - it's chunky! I don't know how
  else to describe it," she says, an odd note of hilarity entering her voice as she pronounces the word
  "chunky".
  Clinton often speaks in this eager, unvarnished way - a world away from the clipped, on-message manner
  of her immediate predecessor in the post, Condoleezza Rice. If anything, she is an undiplomat - known
  less for calibrated circumlocutions than for her plain speaking and sometimes her gaffes, a woman who
  retains both a formidable political constituency and a laugh she once admitted can send cats scurrying
  from a room.
  Her staff point out she is only the third elected politician in 60 years to have served as secretary of state,
  and the first to come from outside the foreign policy establishment since James Baker, George H.W.
  Bush's right-hand man and perhaps her most illustrious recent predecessor. She may be the most
  substantive politician in the office since William Jennings Bryan, the three-time presidential candidate who
  served as secretary almost a century ago. "Her stature on the world stage, her almost presidential
  stature, has set her apart," Bill Burns, the top career diplomat at the State Department, tells me. "Leaders
  want to meet her. And the town hall meetings do make a difference with public opinion."
  State visitor Hillary Clinton is greeted by Air Force Base Commander Colonel Celso de Araujo at S'ao Paulo
  airport in March
  Back in Sao Paulo, the meeting at the university ranges far from the confines and dramatis personae of
  traditional diplomacy. Annie, a young woman with red and blue dreadlocked hair, tells Clinton about her
  dance and percussion classes and asks how to study in the US without paying college fees. A nervous
  young man confesses himself lost halfway through an abstruse question about tariff policy; Clinton,
  smiling and nodding in that vaguely automatic way of hers, bears with him all the same. Another female
  student asks for an autograph. When answering, Clinton sometimes opens her eyes wide as she
  emphasises a phrase; at other moments, seemingly at random, she pulls her hands apart as if
  demonstrating the size of a fish.
  Then a law student called Marina asks about abortion - which is illegal in Brazil - and Clinton moves into
  treacherous terrain. She speaks of the Brazilian hospital she visited in the 1990s that treated not just
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  expectant mothers but women suffering from the consequences of backstreet abortions. "Wealthy women
  have rights in every country," she says. "And poor women don't." Her strength of feeling can't be hidden
  as she denounces "the great toll that illegal abortions take and the denial of women being able to exercise
  such a fundamental personal right".
  Tom Shannon, the US ambassador to Brazil, tells me later: "I understand the possible concern that we
  might have come close to domestic issues. But she wasn't laying out a prescription for Brazil. She was
  sharing her experience as a woman in American politics and as secretary of state." It's true: Clinton
  doesn't quite cross the line. Onstage, she is controlled without seeming artificial, convivial without
  appearing over-effusive, what a previous age would call a real trouper. At the podium she looks straight
  ahead, her lips carefully expressionless. Still, the old competitive instincts haven't left her. Perhaps it is
  the lecterns at press conferences, reminiscent of the Democratic presidential debates, but on exiting the
  podium at a joint appearance with Argentina's president Cristina Fernandez, Clinton makes clear her
  satisfaction at having had the last word. The expert debater who usually bested Obama has not left the
  stage.
  Yet that competitive urge coexists with what one insider describes as her "almost inhuman loyalty"
  towards Obama. Her mastery of the facts - an "information carnivore" one of her officials calls her -
  comes despite the consensus in much of Washington that her role consists largely of implementing the
  foreign policy Obama and his inner circle have framed, rather than helping frame it herself.
  In Sao Paulo, she shows her loyalty in striking fashion when she is asked repeatedly about positive
  discrimination - another sensitive topic in Brazil - not least because, Clinton herself observes, Afro-
  Brazilians account for more than half the country's population but only 2 per cent of university students.
  "That suggests to me that some special steps need to be taken [in] recruiting and admitting students so
  that they can have a chance to succeed," she tells the hall, again inching towards domestic politics, before
  speaking of her pride in the progress the US civil rights movement has made in the past half-century. She
  says: "The election of Barack Obama, many believe, was the greatest accomplishment of all because it
  demonstrated that an African-American could be elected president of the United States."
  Among the crowd, I catch my breath and scribble down her words. It's hard to think of a more fulsome
  statement from the woman who fought so hard against Obama - and who squandered a huge poll lead
  and millions of dollars in the struggle against him.
  The great collaborator Clinton has established strong working relationships within the Obama
  administration
  When I ask Clinton later about how she managed to move from the antagonism of the primary race to the
  obedience of office, she dismisses my question with an anodyne "that's politics". She adds: "We're
  working really hard and well together ... It just never comes up any more, it seems like ancient history to
  me." Not so ancient, I think, that she is willing to admit the failings of her campaign. "I always run
  inclusive and successful organisations," she retorts when I ask her whether she'd applied any lessons from
  that searing experience to her new post.
  She admits she didn't want the job at State - she says she was exhausted by the election and missed the
  Senate -. "but at the end of the day, I'm pretty old-fashioned and if the president asks you to do
  something, you'd better have a really good reason why you can't." Also, she adds: "Suppose I had won
  and I were asking him to be in my cabinet ... I would have wanted him to say yes."
  Others say the relationship is more complex, that by dint of her loyalty and unflagging hard work, Clinton
  has moved closer to the charmed circle and made herself an even more formidable political force than
  before. "Quite simply, she gives good advice and the president over a year and a half has recognised
  that," says Anne-Marie Slaughter, head of the State Department policy planning unit. "The relationship is
  based on her performance in the job."
  By all accounts, it's a collaborative partnership, though not perhaps a warm one. Clinton boasts a good
  working relationship with the main players of the administration - and has formed something of an
  alliance with defence secretary Robert Gates, although on life-and-death issues such as Afghanistan, it is
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  Gates, not her, who has taken the lead. As one official told me, secretaries of state have often either been
  popular with their own department - Colin Powell comes to mind - or with the rest of the administration -
  as was Condoleezza Rice - but Clinton has managed to be both.
  In truth, Clinton's language remains harder-edged than Obama's - she recently claimed that Iran's
  Revolutionary Guard had staged a slow-motion coup - and she has sometimes been more willing than he
  is to hint at using the military. "She seems to step up with a bit of spine just at the right time," says Kurt
  Volker, a US ambassador to Nato under George W. Bush.
  She has also assumed an ever more prominent role in talking to leaders such as Benjamin Netanyahu of
  Israel and Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan - apparently because she is trusted both by them and Obama.
  Meanwhile, she has been careful to keep her husband, the former US president, in the background. Aides
  say they have barely seen him in the building - though Clinton herself says that behind the scenes Bill
  Clinton gives her strategic advice. "One of his favourite sayings, that I remind myself of all the time, is a
  kind of baseball saying," she says: "Don't major in the minors; keep your eye on not just the headlines
  but the trend lines."
  It is her co-operative stance rather than any notable effort to set out a grand vision of her own that is the
  chief theme of her time so far at State. When I ask Clinton to name her proudest achievement in office,
  she replies "the effective and collaborative approach that this administration has taken towards identifying
  and solving problems." A more process-oriented, less provocative answer would be hard to imagine.
  But maybe, I think, the US has less scope for grand strategy than it did in the past couple of decades,
  when the country seemed to bestride the world colossus-style. Clinton herself suggests that so formidable
  are the tasks confronting the US that the administration has little scope to enter into internecine fights but
  needs instead to focus on the challenges to hand. Whatever the reason for her stance, it seems to be a
  smart decision - by all accounts she's overcome many of the suspicions the White House retinue had
  towards her.
  "It's fair to say that she was not born into the administration's inner circle but slowly but surely, for the
  most consequential decisions, she now has a prime seat at the table," says one official. Praising what he
  calls her "Terminator-quality durability and determination," he adds: "She's done an amazing amount of
  work, judging that the way to build a strategic vision is bottom up, by mastering the details."
  Indeed, Clinton's ability to master the most arcane foreign policy briefs is the marvel of her building. She
  has dropped into obscure working groups and shown an unnerving knowledge of their details. At her
  confirmation hearings last year she exchanged facts about the arctic with an Alaskan senator; at the
  meeting in So Paulo she becomes enthused about freight transport policy both in Brazil and the US. She
  herself acknowledges that finding her feet on foreign policy was something of a struggle, despite her
  campaign claims of expertise in the field. "It was so intellectually challenging, just to get our arms around
  all of these issues," she says. During her first year, she was criticised for apparent gaffes - including the
  way she called for Israel to halt all building of settlements on occupied territory only to hail a partial freeze
  a few months later as unprecedented. On an election campaign, she says, "you may be in a different city
  four times a day but you have a message you're trying to deliver that is repetitive and aimed at your
  audience. But here you might deal with 10 different countries' problems, six different regional or global
  challenges in the course of a day."
  As the Latin America tour shows, she is now trying to do both - travel incessantly and solve an array of
  international issues. She is at the forefront of the US's efforts to consolidate relations with a number of
  important countries - predominantly Russia and China, but also rising powers such as Brazil, Turkey,
  Indonesia and South Africa - and to cool down anti-American feeling in hotspots, notably Pakistan. She
  says the push is working, hailing a "change in public opinion in places that were pretty negative about the
  US" - a reference to Russia and Pakistan. But it is far from smooth sailing. Differences about Iran and
  over Israel's raid on aid-bearing ships off Gaza have stoked tensions with Turkey and Brazil recently, amid
  questioning of the effectiveness of the Obama administration's policies.
  During my time with her on the road, the stop in Brazil is the focal point - not surprising given the
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  country's increased profile as Latin America leader. Clinton is now heading the administration's push to
  secure sanctions on Iran, and in Brasilia she tries and fails to win President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to her
  cause. She employs an almost combative tone at a press conference with Celso Amorim, Brazil's foreign
  minister. At moments she appears to barely contain her irritation, as she denounces "an Iran that runs to
  Brazil" as well as other countries such as Turkey and China "telling different things to different people to
  avoid international sanctions". Amorim is spiky in his own way - drawing parallels to the 1990s sanctions
  on Iraq and the claims about weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 war. "Of course, I don't agree
  with everything the Secretary said," he says.
  It is not a happy experience - indeed this past week both Brazil and Turkey voted against sanctions at the
  United Nations - yet Hillary Clinton is nowhere near giving up. Years ago, one of Bill Clinton's biographers
  described his approach to government as a "permanent campaign", and it appears to be his wife's
  preferred form of existence as well. If there is one constant in Clinton's life, it is that she never throws in
  her cards, whether what motivates her is power or public service.
  "Never, never!" she exclaims, when I ask whether she ever thought of walking off into the wings after the
  frustrations and indignities of her time at the White House. "I have a very realistic sense of what high-
  stakes politics requires and it took me a while to get there because it's shocking when you are in the
  arena ... but once you figure it out, you can take it seriously for purposes of analysis and understanding,
  but you can't take it personally." Such treatment seems to rankle all the same. She's been listening to
  coverage ahead of the British debate and is plainly irritated by the coverage of the leaders' wives.
  "Whether a woman's running for office or she's supporting her husband who's running for office and she
  gets criticised for wearing open-toed shoes or for the colour of her coat, there's just a lot of history that
  you bear if you are a woman who puts herself out in the political arena," she says.
  Another country Clinton boards her official 727 to fly from Sao Paulo to Costa Rica
  Injustice towards women appears to be the issue that most enthuses Clinton in this job - as in her many
  other incarnations in American public life, whether as First Lady or before. "I feel passionately it is in not
  just the American national security interests but the world's, that women be given the opportunities and
  the tools to make the most out of their own lives," she says.
  In the 1990s she steered clear of reading the newspapers because of the way she was treated. Today, she
  says, "I certainly don't read coverage of me, I read what else is going on that I need to know about to do
  my job." "It's all baloney," says Philippe Reines, her press adviser, who set up the meeting with her and is
  sitting to one side in her office.
  "Yeah, yeah, right, that's what he tells me," Clinton responds.
  I wonder. She may not read the stories about her, but she has boosted her domestic profile still further by
  talking to American magazines such as Esquire, Vogue and Parade. To what end? Clinton has said she will
  only serve one four-year term as secretary of state - understandable, given the grind of the job. When I
  ask whether she expects a woman president in the next decade or so, she responds: "I'd love that,
  obviously I would love that. I want to be front and centre when it happens."
  "Any chance it would be you?" I ask.
  "No, no, I don't think that's in the cards," Clinton says. She's given more categoric denials in the past. "I
  think that there's a whole generation of young women and not so young, but mature, seasoned women
  who are earning their stripes and recognising how tough it is out there. It is not for the faint of heart to
  run for president, and I believe it is harder for women, it just is, and that's just a fact." But, says one US
  official, "all the profiles and all this media treatment undercut the argument that she is finished with
  electoral politics. Why do all this stuff? She's already Hillary Clinton. You have to ask: 'What's the idea
  behind raising her domestic profile still further?"
  Indeed she is now, by some counts, the most popular politician in America and some in Washington say
  she could be a good fit for the vice-presidential slot in the 2012 elections.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  Back in Sao Paulo, once the town hall meeting is over, Clinton faces a seven-hour flight to Costa Rica. The
  journey goes on and on, and as saleswoman-in-chief for the US in an unruly world, she faces a long, hard
  road. Today the US sometimes struggles to assert itself on the world stage. But the obstacles are rather
  fewer if the product she is pitching is herself. A secretary of state like none before her, Hillary Clinton,
  long one of the most formidable figures in US politics, is looking stronger than ever.
  Daniel Dombey is the FT's US diplomatic correspondent
  David Miliband: "Hillary is a rock star ... she has a great sense of fun, and a great sense of humour"
  It's too early to start chalking up a scorecard because Hillary Clinton, and the Obama administration, is
  laying the foundations for long-term change in America's foreign policy. The challenges are immense -
  probably more difficult than the inheritance of any previous administration. But American leadership is
  essential and a commitment to multilateralism - in fact multi, multilateralism using different and
  overlapping forums - is real and right.
  You also have to remember that Hillary is a rock star. When I arrived at the Nato Foreign Ministers
  meeting in March 2009, it was a nice surprise that all the staff, never mind the press, seemed to have
  turned out in droves for my arrival. Then I realised that Hillary was 10 minutes behind me.
  That said, the thing that most surprised me about working with Clinton was not her intelligence or her
  hard work, all of which are well known, but that behind the serious exterior is someone who has a great
  sense of fun, and a great sense of humour. She has seen politics from all sides, and can laugh at herself
  as well as at others.
  She's a remarkably good listener, always synthesising ideas and opinions to develop her own. She thinks
  strategically as well as tactically. She's also very, very unpompous. Hillary is a very political person but in
  a particular way, she honours politics and public service and believes that democratic politics is not a
  necessary evil, but a calling of value and vocation. She knows you win some and you lose some, but it's
  essential to take part.
  There's one other thing. Hillary is a people person in that she thinks deeply about the psychology of the
  people she's dealing with. Their motivation, their loyalties, their culture. It's real emotional intelligence in
  trying to understand why people disagree and how you can get them to agree. I think that must be why
  so many other members of the administration say she is a very good colleague.
  David Miliband is shadow foreign secretary
  Gideon Rachman: "Relations between the White House and the State Department are not particularly
  close"
  A school teacher asked to write a report on Hillary Clinton's stint as secretary of state would have to give
  her 10/10 for effort but a rather more modest mark for actual achievements - maybe a six or a seven.
  Secretaries of state are generally judged on two criteria. First, how have they done in the endless
  bureaucratic turf wars that characterise Washington politics? Second, how effective have they been in
  promoting US foreign policy in the wider world? Success in one area usually helps in the other. Henry
  Kissinger was a superb Washington infighter - and his close relationship with President Nixon made him
  all the more effective overseas. Colin Powell, George W. Bush's first secretary of state, was widely
  admired outside the US - but came out on the wrong side of many of the Washington battles, which
  limited his ability to get things done in the wider world.
  Hillary Clinton has skilfully avoided being sucked into the debilitating Washington struggles that so
  damaged Powell. Despite the often poisonous rivalry between the Obama and Clinton camps during the
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015
  campaign, Clinton has a good working relationship with the president. But while relations between the
  White House and the State Department are cordial, they do not seem to be particularly close. Clinton
  appointed many loyalists from her own campaign to the State Department, with the result that State is
  rather detached from Obama's inner circle. Obama's penchant for making high-profile speeches in foreign
  capitals such as Cairo, Prague, Tokyo and Istanbul means that the president himself has done more than
  anyone else to define his administration's approach to the world.
  That still leaves a role for Clinton to fill in the crucial details of policy. But special representatives have
  been appointed to deal with Afghanistan and the Middle East - and the Treasury is critical to China policy.
  Asked about Clinton's impact as secretary of state, one senior European policymaker purses his lips and
  says: "She's done some great trips, and she's highly professional. But it's hard to see any particular area
  where she has really driven policy."
  Gideon Rachman is the FT's chief foreign affairs columnist
  David Rothkopf: "When she has been asked to deliver tough messages, she has done so unflinchingly"
  Hillary Clinton has been a cautious secretary of state: she has protected the president well and pursued
  his agenda without upstaging him - an early concern, given her stature. She has worked very well with
  other members of the cabinet, and is reconsidering the role and structure of the State Department.
  That includes a review of the role of diplomacy going forward. Clinton has not only acknowledged the rise
  of new powers and a changing global power structure but has taken steps to reshape US foreign policy
  structure accordingly. An important part of that has been recognising the importance of co-operating with
  private and non-state actors such as NG0s, as well as dealing with non-state threats.
  When the administration has called upon her to deliver tough messages, she has done so unflinchingly.
  This has allowed the president to articulate a strategic vision which Clinton then goes about implementing.
  Still, neither the secretary of state nor the president determines the global situation. The US may be the
  most powerful country in the world but it is one among many powerful countries, and many aspects of the
  situation we face today are beyond our control. The Obama administration has been dealt an extremely
  difficult hand: not only Iraq and Afghanistan, but Iran and North Korea's nuclear programmes, the rise of
  emerging powers and a complex and still unfolding series of financial crises.
  We have gone from a world in which the US thought it had limitless resources and unbounded options to
  one where the limits are clear; from a world in which you could work in the GB to one where you have to
  work in the context of the G20; a world where new technologies and new powers play a bigger role. All of
  those things would dictate a change in foreign policy regardless of who is in office.
  Hillary Clinton has established a very solid foundation. The next step is to identify a couple of signature
  issues - and have a couple of signature successes. That will take her to the next level.
  David Rothkopf is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace with expertise in
  national security
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769875 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769878
MetadataSubject: FT
MetadataTo: Reines, Philippe
MetadataFrom: jake.sullivan
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-11T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769878/C05769878.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FT
ExtractedTo: Evergreen<Hdr22@clintonemai1.com>
ExtractedFrom: Philippe Reines <
ExtractedCc: CDM<cheryl.mill
ExtractedDateSent: Friday, June 11, 2010 9:24 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769878
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  ; Huma Abedin<Huma@clintonemail.com>; Jake
  RELEASE IN PART B6

RawText:
  From: Philippe Reines <
  Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 19:44:24 -0400
  To: Evergreen<Hdr22@clintonemai1.com>
  Cc: CDM<cheryl.mill
  Sullivan<jake.sulliv
  Subject: FT
  ; Huma Abedin<Huma@clintonemail.com>; Jake
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: jake.sullivan
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 9:24 PM
  To: Philippe Reines; H
  Cc: CDM; Huma Abedin
  Subject: Re: FT
  I dont know what others think, but I quite enjoyed this. Go Dan.
  Sent from my BlackBerry® smartphone with SprintSpeed
  Our clips service doesn't have the license necessary to provide FT (or Reuters) content, so here's the long awaited FT
  profile —you'll be especially interested in the guest column David Milliband wrote:
  An FT interview with Hillary Clinton
  By Daniel Dombey
  FT
  June 11 2010 22:21
  This is what it is like to be Hillary Clinton. The motorcade, twisting and skidding through rain-splashed
  streets for more than an hour; the public meetings and camera lights at journey's end; the spotlight that
  has not let up for two decades. It is almost as if the 2008 US presidential election — hailed as the most
  exciting for a generation — had never ended.
  But this is a campaign without a vote. Today, Clinton's convoy is snaking through Sao Paulo, Brazil, not
  South Hampton, New Hampshire. She herself is no longer an aspirant for the White House, despite what
  the overnight flights, town hall meetings and strategy sessions that make up her gruelling schedule might
  suggest. Instead, she is in Latin America to shore up relations with the region and promote a new idea of
  US leadership, one very much built around herself.
  She's had bigger and more ecstatic audiences than the 700-odd students and staff crammed into the hall
  tonight at Zumbi dos Pradares, an Afro-Brazilian university, but she's still greeted by a wave of raised
  arms as the audience snaps away at her with their mobile phones.
  In the convoy moments before, she was wrapped in a shawl, suffering from a cold and angry at the delays
  that pushed us into the side streets speckled with box-like bars, warehouses and love hotels while
  Brazilian motorists sought to cut into our path. There is no sign of that now. With the metabolism of a
  born politician, she feeds off the energy of her audience and takes questions from students, teachers and
  local celebrities for an hour. Hillary Clinton never looks happier than when she is centre stage.
  Most US secretaries of state wouldn't bother with this sort of event, much less initiate it and arrange for it
  to be screened on the biggest local channel. Yet this is what Clinton does on almost every foreign trip —
  and she seems to spend half her life on her official 727, crammed with long-time aides and armed
  bodyguards. The schedule is backbreaking and constantly shifting. She has notched up more than a
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  quarter of a million miles since taking office.
  On this Latin America trip, thrown into confusion by an earthquake in Chile, we have already visited four
  countries in 24 hours. We go to tiny Uruguay, where our stay is so brief we check into a hotel just for a
  shower; Argentina, where we spend almost all our time at the presidential palace; Chile itself, where we
  don't leave the airport; and Brazil, where we spend almost a full day.
  So what exactly is Clinton trying to do on this never-ending world tour? Travelling with her for a week,
  talking to people inside and outside the administration, I tried to find out.
  "We now have a case to make and it is not just a case that is made to the president or the prime minister
  or the foreign minister or an ambassador," she tells me a few weeks later, as she perches on a sofa in her
  expansive office, with its view of the Lincoln Memorial. "People now have a voice and an opinion and a
  vote in many instances on the direction that their own societies take ... I want to model a different kind of
  leadership that is open and willing to listen but [also] to stand our ground if necessary."
  She argues that these trips of hers help to restore the US's image in the wake of the Bush administration
  - by making contact with public opinion abroad, and so boosting American power. Her aides say that, as a
  battle-hardened politician who also happens to be one of the most famous women in the world, she is
  ideally placed to carry out the task. But the deeper question is whether she is merely implementing the
  foreign policy crafted by Barack Obama, her boss and former rival, or whether her role - and ambitions -
  go beyond that.
  Is she a kind of saleswoman-in-chief for the US, I ask? "Well, I think that is part of the job," she replies,
  toying with the napkin underneath her glass of water. "If you are making a case for American values and
  for American leadership, you have to make it where people now get information ... Given the bridges we
  had to build and some of the repair work we had to do, we had to travel."
  As in Sao Paulo, her system is under strain - "I've been fighting this all day," she says as she masks a
  cough set off by her allergies (Washington's cherry blossom trees are shedding their flowers). Life is still
  hectic - the volcanic ash cloud has just all but paralysed Europe and televisions throughout the State
  Department are showing the first British election debate. But Clinton remains enthusiastic, affable and
  unhurried, her speech peppered with exclamations such as "oh my gosh", even as she discusses issues of
  state. She politely asks if I have any updates for her about Europe's airspace shutdown and tells me she's
  been talking to Norway's foreign minister about it.
  "He said that this dust gets into engines of any size, even Air Force One - it's chunky! I don't know how
  else to describe it," she says, an odd note of hilarity entering her voice as she pronounces the word
  "chunky".
  Clinton often speaks in this eager, unvarnished way - a world away from the clipped, on-message manner
  of her immediate predecessor in the post, Condoleezza Rice. If anything, she is an undiplomat - known
  less for calibrated circumlocutions than for her plain speaking and sometimes her gaffes, a woman who
  retains both a formidable political constituency and a laugh she once admitted can send cats scurrying
  from a room.
  Her staff point out she is only the third elected politician in 60 years to have served as secretary of state,
  and the first to come from outside the foreign policy establishment since James Baker, George H.W.
  Bush's right-hand man and perhaps her most illustrious recent predecessor. She may be the most
  substantive politician in the office since William Jennings Bryan, the three-time presidential candidate who
  served as secretary almost a century ago. "Her stature on the world stage, her almost presidential
  stature, has set her apart," Bill Burns, the top career diplomat at the State Department, tells me. "Leaders
  want to meet her. And the town hall meetings do make a difference with public opinion."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  State visitor Hillary Clinton is greeted by Air Force Base Commander Colonel Celso de Araujo at Sao Paulo
  airport in March
  Back in Sao Paulo, the meeting at the university ranges far from the confines and dramatis personae of
  traditional diplomacy. Annie, a young woman with red and blue dreadlocked hair, tells Clinton about her
  dance and percussion classes and asks how to study in the US without paying college fees. A nervous
  young man confesses himself lost halfway through an abstruse question about tariff policy; Clinton,
  smiling and nodding in that vaguely automatic way of hers, bears with him all the same. Another female
  student asks for an autograph. When answering, Clinton sometimes opens her eyes wide as she
  emphasises a phrase; at other moments, seemingly at random, she pulls her hands apart as if
  demonstrating the size of a fish.
  Then a law student called Marina asks about abortion - which is illegal in Brazil - and Clinton moves into
  treacherous terrain. She speaks of the Brazilian hospital she visited in the 1990s that treated not just
  expectant mothers but women suffering from the consequences of backstreet abortions. "Wealthy women
  have rights in every country," she says. "And poor women don't." Her strength of feeling can't be hidden
  as she denounces "the great toll that illegal abortions take and the denial of women being able to exercise
  such a fundamental personal right".
  Tom Shannon, the US ambassador to Brazil, tells me later: "I understand the possible concern that we
  might have come close to domestic issues. But she wasn't laying out a prescription for Brazil. She was
  sharing her experience as a woman in American politics and as secretary of state." It's true: Clinton
  doesn't quite cross the line. Onstage, she is controlled without seeming artificial, convivial without
  appearing over-effusive, what a previous age would call a real trouper. At the podium she looks straight
  ahead, her lips carefully expressionless. Still, the old competitive instincts haven't left her. Perhaps it is
  the lecterns at press conferences, reminiscent of the Democratic presidential debates, but on exiting the
  podium at a joint appearance with Argentina's president Cristina Fernandez, Clinton makes clear her
  satisfaction at having had the last word. The expert debater who usually bested Obama has not left the
  stage.
  Yet that competitive urge coexists with what one insider describes as her "almost inhuman loyalty"
  towards Obama. Her mastery of the facts - an "information carnivore" one of her officials calls her -
  comes despite the consensus in much of Washington that her role consists largely of implementing the
  foreign policy Obama and his inner circle have framed, rather than helping frame it herself.
  In Sao Paulo, she shows her loyalty in striking fashion when she is asked repeatedly about positive
  discrimination - another sensitive topic in Brazil - not least because, Clinton herself observes, Afro-
  Brazilians account for more than half the country's population but only 2 per cent of university students.
  "That suggests to me that some special steps need to be taken [in] recruiting and admitting students so
  that they can have a chance to succeed," she tells the hall, again inching towards domestic politics, before
  speaking of her pride in the progress the US civil rights movement has made in the past half-century. She
  says: "The election of Barack Obama, many believe, was the greatest accomplishment of all because it
  demonstrated that an African-American could be elected president of the United States."
  Among the crowd, I catch my breath and scribble down her words. It's hard to think of a more fulsome
  statement from the woman who fought so hard against Obama - and who squandered a huge poll lead
  and millions of dollars in the struggle against him.
  The great collaborator Clinton has established strong working relationships within the Obama
  administration
  When I ask Clinton later about how she managed to move from the antagonism of the primary race to the
  obedience of office, she dismisses my question with an anodyne "that's politics". She adds: "We're
  working really hard and well together ... It just never comes up any more, it seems like ancient history to
  me." Not so ancient, I think, that she is willing to admit the failings of her campaign. "I always run
  inclusive and successful organisations," she retorts when I ask her whether she'd applied any lessons from
  that searing experience to her new post.
  She admits she didn't want the job at State - she says she was exhausted by the election and missed the
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  Senate - "but at the end of the day, I'm pretty old-fashioned and if the president asks you to do
  something, you'd better have a really good reason why you can't." Also, she adds: "Suppose I had won
  and I were asking him to be in my cabinet ... I would have wanted him to say yes."
  Others say the relationship is more complex, that by dint of her loyalty and unflagging hard work, Clinton
  has moved closer to the charmed circle and made herself an even more formidable political force than
  before. "Quite simply, she gives good advice and the president over a year and a half has recognised
  that," says Anne-Marie Slaughter, head of the State Department policy planning unit. "The relationship is
  based on her performance in the job."
  By all accounts, it's a collaborative partnership, though not perhaps a warm one. Clinton boasts a good
  working relationship with the main players of the administration - and has formed something of an
  alliance with defence secretary Robert Gates, although on life-and-death issues such as Afghanistan, it is
  Gates, not her, who has taken the lead. As one official told me, secretaries of state have often either been
  popular with their own department - Colin Powell comes to mind - or with the rest of the administration -
  as was Condoleezza Rice - but Clinton has managed to be both.
  In truth, Clinton's language remains harder-edged than Obama's - she recently claimed that Iran's
  Revolutionary Guard had staged a slow-motion coup - and she has sometimes been more willing than he
  is to hint at using the military. "She seems to step up with a bit of spine just at the right time," says Kurt
  Volker, a US ambassador to Nato under George W. Bush.
  She has also assumed an ever more prominent role in talking to leaders such as Benjamin Netanyahu of
  Israel and Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan - apparently because she is trusted both by them and Obama.
  Meanwhile, she has been careful to keep her husband, the former US president, in the background. Aides
  say they have barely seen him in the building - though Clinton herself says that behind the scenes Bill
  Clinton gives her strategic advice. "One of his favourite sayings, that I remind myself of all the time, is a
  kind of baseball saying," she says: "Don't major in the minors; keep your eye on not just the headlines
  but the trend lines."
  It is her co-operative stance rather than any notable effort to set out a grand vision of her own that is the
  chief theme of her time so far at State. When I ask Clinton to name her proudest achievement in office,
  she replies "the effective and collaborative approach that this administration has taken towards identifying
  and solving problems." A more process-oriented, less provocative answer would be hard to imagine.
  But maybe, I think, the US has less scope for grand strategy than it did in the past couple of decades,
  when the country seemed to bestride the world colossus-style. Clinton herself suggests that so formidable
  are the tasks confronting the US that the administration has little scope to enter into internecine fights but
  needs instead to focus on the challenges to hand. Whatever the reason for her stance, it seems to be a
  smart decision - by all accounts she's overcome many of the suspicions the White House retinue had
  towards her.
  "It's fair to say that she was not born into the administration's inner circle but slowly but surely, for the
  most consequential decisions, she now has a prime seat at the table," says one official. Praising what he
  calls her "Terminator-quality durability and determination," he adds: "She's done an amazing amount of
  work, judging that the way to build a strategic vision is bottom up, by mastering the details."
  Indeed, Clinton's ability to master the most arcane foreign policy briefs is the marvel of her building. She
  has dropped into obscure working groups and shown an unnerving knowledge of their details. At her
  confirmation hearings last year she exchanged facts about the arctic with an Alaskan senator; at the
  meeting in Sao Paulo she becomes enthused about freight transport policy both in Brazil and the US. She
  herself acknowledges that finding her feet on foreign policy was something of a struggle, despite her
  campaign claims of expertise in the field. "It was so intellectually challenging, just to get our arms around
  all of these issues," she says. During her first year, she was criticised for apparent gaffes - including the
  way she called for Israel to halt all building of settlements on occupied territory only to hail a partial freeze
  a few months later as unprecedented. On an election campaign, she says, "you may be in a different city
  four times a day but you have a message you're trying to deliver that is repetitive and aimed at your
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  audience. But here you might deal with 10 different countries' problems, six different regional or global
  challenges in the course of a day."
  As the Latin America tour shows, she is now trying to do both - travel incessantly and solve an array of
  international issues. She is at the forefront of the US's efforts to consolidate relations with a number of
  important countries - predominantly Russia and China, but also rising powers such as Brazil, Turkey,
  Indonesia and South Africa - and to cool down anti-American feeling in hotspots, notably Pakistan. She
  says the push is working, hailing a "change in public opinion in places that were pretty negative about the
  US" - a reference to Russia and Pakistan. But it is far from smooth sailing. Differences about Iran and
  over Israel's raid on aid-bearing ships off Gaza have stoked tensions with Turkey and Brazil recently, amid
  questioning of the effectiveness of the Obama administration's policies.
  During my time with her on the road, the stop in Brazil is the focal point - not surprising given the
  country's increased profile as Latin America leader. Clinton is now heading the administration's push to
  secure sanctions on Iran, and in Brasilia she tries and fails to win President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva to her
  cause. She employs an almost combative tone at a press conference with Celso Amorim, Brazil's foreign
  minister. At moments she appears to barely contain her irritation, as she denounces "an Iran that runs to
  Brazil" as well as other countries such as Turkey and China "telling different things to different people to
  avoid international sanctions". Amorim is spiky in his own way - drawing parallels to the 1990s sanctions
  on Iraq and the claims about weapons of mass destruction before the 2003 war. "Of course, I don't agree
  with everything the Secretary said," he says.
  It is not a happy experience - indeed this past week both Brazil and Turkey voted against sanctions at the
  United Nations - yet Hillary Clinton is nowhere near giving up. Years ago, one of Bill Clinton's biographers
  described his approach to government as a "permanent campaign", and it appears to be his wife's
  preferred form of existence as well. If there is one constant in Clinton's life, it is that she never throws in
  her cards, whether what motivates her is power or public service.
  "Never, never!" she exclaims, when I ask whether she ever thought of walking off into the wings after the
  frustrations and indignities of her time at the White House. "I have a very realistic sense of what high-
  stakes politics requires and it took me a while to get there because it's shocking when you are in the
  arena ... but once you figure it out, you can take it seriously for purposes of analysis and understanding,
  but you can't take it personally." Such treatment seems to rankle all the same. She's been listening to
  coverage ahead of the British debate and is plainly irritated by the coverage of the leaders' wives.
  "Whether a woman's running for office or she's supporting her husband who's running for office and she
  gets criticised for wearing open-toed shoes or for the colour of her coat, there's just a lot of history that
  you bear if you are a woman who puts herself out in the political arena," she says.
  Another country Clinton boards her official 727 to fly from Sao Paulo to Costa Rica
  Injustice towards women appears to be the issue that most enthuses Clinton in this job - as in her many
  other incarnations in American public life, whether as First Lady or before. "I feel passionately it is in not
  just the American national security interests but the world's, that women be given the opportunities and
  the tools to make the most out of their own lives," she says.
  In the 1990s she steered clear of reading the newspapers because of the way she was treated. Today, she
  says, "I certainly don't read coverage of me, I read what else is going on that I need to know about to do
  my job." "It's all baloney," says Philippe Reines, her press adviser, who set up the meeting with her and is
  sitting to one side in her office.
  "Yeah, yeah, right, that's what he tells me," Clinton responds.
  I wonder. She may not read the stories about her, but she has boosted her domestic profile still further by
  talking to American magazines such as Esquire, Vogue and Parade. To what end? Clinton has said she will
  only serve one four-year term as secretary of state - understandable, given the grind of the job. When I
  ask whether she expects a woman president in the next decade or so, she responds: "I'd love that,
  obviously I would love that. I want to be front and centre when it happens."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  "Any chance it would be you?" I ask.
  "No, no, I don't think that's in the cards," Clinton says. She's given more categoric denials in the past. "I
  think that there's a whole generation of young women and not so young, but mature, seasoned women
  who are earning their stripes and recognising how tough it is out there. It is not for the faint of heart to
  run for president, and I believe it is harder for women, it just is, and that's just a fact." But, says one US
  official, "all the profiles and all this media treatment undercut the argument that she is finished with
  electoral politics. Why do all this stuff? She's already Hillary Clinton. You have to ask: 'What's the idea
  behind raising her domestic profile still further?"
  Indeed she is now, by some counts, the most popular politician in America and some in Washington say
  she could be a good fit for the vice-presidential slot in the 2012 elections.
  Back in Sao Paulo, once the town hall meeting is over, Clinton faces a seven-hour flight to Costa Rica. The
  journey goes on and on, and as saleswoman-in-chief for the US in an unruly world, she faces a long, hard
  road. Today the US sometimes struggles to assert itself on the world stage. But the obstacles are rather
  fewer if the product she is pitching is herself. A secretary of state like none before her, Hillary Clinton,
  long one of the most formidable figures in US politics, is looking stronger than ever.
  Daniel Dombey is the FT's US diplomatic correspondent
  David Miliband: "Hillary is a rock star ... she has a great sense of fun, and a great sense of humour"
  It's too early to start chalking up a scorecard because Hillary Clinton, and the Obama administration, is
  laying the foundations for long-term change in America's foreign policy. The challenges are immense -
  probably more difficult than the inheritance of any previous administration. But American leadership is
  essential and a commitment to multilateralism - in fact multi, multilateralism using different and
  overlapping forums - is real and right.
  You also have to remember that Hillary is a rock star. When I arrived at the Nato Foreign Ministers
  meeting in March 2009, it was a nice surprise that all the staff, never mind the press, seemed to have
  turned out in droves for my arrival. Then I realised that Hillary was 10 minutes behind me.
  That said, the thing that most surprised me about working with Clinton was not her intelligence or her
  hard work, all of which are well known, but that behind the serious exterior is someone who has a great
  sense of fun, and a great sense of humour. She has seen politics from all sides, and can laugh at herself
  as well as at others.
  She's a remarkably good listener, always synthesising ideas and opinions to develop her own. She thinks
  strategically as well as tactically. She's also very, very unpompous. Hillary is a very political person but in
  a particular way, she honours politics and public service and believes that democratic politics is not a
  necessary evil, but a calling of value and vocation. She knows you win some and you lose some, but it's
  essential to take part.
  There's one other thing. Hillary is a people person in that she thinks deeply about the psychology of the
  people she's dealing with. Their motivation, their loyalties, their culture. It's real emotional intelligence in
  trying to understand why people disagree and how you can get them to agree. I think that must be why
  so many other members of the administration say she is a very good colleague.
  David Miliband is shadow foreign secretary
  Gideon Rachman: "Relations between the White House and the State Department are not particularly
  close"
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015
  A school teacher asked to write a report on Hillary Clinton's stint as secretary of state would have to give
  her 10/10 for effort but a rather more modest mark for actual achievements - maybe a six or a seven.
  Secretaries of state are generally judged on two criteria. First, how have they done in the endless
  bureaucratic turf wars that characterise Washington politics? Second, how effective have they been in
  promoting US foreign policy in the wider world? Success in one area usually helps in the other. Henry
  Kissinger was a superb Washington infighter - and his close relationship with President Nixon made him
  all the more effective overseas. Colin Powell, George W. Bush's first secretary of state, was widely
  admired outside the US - but came out on the wrong side of many of the Washington battles, which
  limited his ability to get things done in the wider world.
  Hillary Clinton has skilfully avoided being sucked into the debilitating Washington struggles that so
  damaged Powell. Despite the often poisonous rivalry between the Obama and Clinton camps during the
  campaign, Clinton has a good working relationship with the president. But while relations between the
  White House and the State Department are cordial, they do not seem to be particularly close. Clinton
  appointed many loyalists from her own campaign to the State Department, with the result that State is
  rather detached from Obama's inner circle. Obama's penchant for making high-profile speeches in foreign
  capitals such as Cairo, Prague, Tokyo and Istanbul means that the president himself has done more than
  anyone else to define his administration's approach to the world.
  That still leaves a role for Clinton to fill in the crucial details of policy. But special representatives have
  been appointed to deal with Afghanistan and the Middle East - and the Treasury is critical to China policy.
  Asked about Clinton's impact as secretary of state, one senior European policymaker purses his lips and
  says: "She's done some great trips, and she's highly professional. But it's hard to see any particular area
  where she has really driven policy."
  Gideon Rachman is the FT's chief foreign affairs columnist
  David Rothkopf: "When she has been asked to deliver tough messages, she has done so unflinchingly"
  Hillary Clinton has been a cautious secretary of state: she has protected the president well and pursued
  his agenda without upstaging him - an early concern, given her stature. She has worked very well with
  other members of the cabinet, and is reconsidering the role and structure of the State Department.
  That includes a review of the role of diplomacy going forward. Clinton has not only acknowledged the rise
  of new powers and a changing global power structure but has taken steps to reshape US foreign policy
  structure accordingly. An important part of that has been recognising the importance of co-operating with
  private and non-state actors such as NG05, as well as dealing with non-state threats.
  When the administration has called upon her to deliver tough messages, she has done so unflinchingly.
  This has allowed the president to articulate a strategic vision which Clinton then goes about implementing.
  Still, neither the secretary of state nor the president determines the global situation. The US may be the
  most powerful country in the world but it is one among many powerful countries, and many aspects of the
  situation we face today are beyond our control. The Obama administration has been dealt an extremely
  difficult hand: not only Iraq and Afghanistan, but Iran and North Korea's nuclear programmes, the rise of
  emerging powers and a complex and still unfolding series of financial crises.
  We have gone from a world in which the US thought it had limitless resources and unbounded options to
  one where the limits are clear; from a world in which you could work in the G8 to one where you have to
  work in the context of the G20; a world where new technologies and new powers play a bigger role. All of
  those things would dictate a change in foreign policy regardless of who is in office.
  Hillary Clinton has established a very solid foundation. The next step is to identify a couple of signature
  issues - and have a couple of signature successes. That will take her to the next level.
  David Rothkopf is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace with expertise in
  national security
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769878 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769879
MetadataSubject: (REUTERS) KYRGYZSTAN ASKS RUSSIA TO HELP QUELL ETHNIC CLASHES
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769879/C05769879.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: (Reuters) Kyrgyzstan asks Russia to help quell ethnic clashes
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: SES-O_Shift-II
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:44 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769879
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769879 Date: 08/31/2015 _
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:44 AM
  To:
  Subject: Fw: (Reuters) Kyrgyzstan asks Russia to help quell ethnic clashes
  From: Pearce, Jennifer
  To: NEWS-SCA; NEWS-EUR; NEWS-Mahogany; S_SpecialAssistants
  Cc: SES-O_Shift-II
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 07:53:56 2010
  Subject: (Reuters) Kyrgyzstan asks Russia to help quell ethnic clashes
  OSH - Kyrgyzstan appealed for Russian help to stop ethnic fighting that has killed at least 62 and left parts of its second-
  largest city in flames, the worst violence since the president was toppled in April. The interim government in
  Kyrgyzstan, which hosts U.S. and Russian military bases, said it was powerless to stop armed gangs from burning down
  the homes and businesses of ethnic Uzbeks in parts of Osh. Gun battles raged throughout the night.
  "We need the entry of outside armed forces to calm the situation down," interim government leader Roza Otunbayeva
  told reporters. "We have appealed to Russia for help and I have already signed such a letter for President Dmitry
  Medvedev."
  Russian PM Putin and Otunbayeva discussed the situation in a telephone call on June 12, the Russian government's press
  service said, without giving details.
  A Reuters correspondent in Osh said gun battles had taken place through the night in an Uzbek neighbourhood. Gas was
  shut off to Osh and some neighborhoods have no electricity. "Entire streets are on fire," Interior Ministry spokesman
  Rakhmatillo Akhmedov said. "The situation is very bad. There is no sign of it stopping. Homes have been set ablaze."
  Otunbayeva said Osh was also facing a humanitarian crisis as food was running out. She said her government had
  decided to open the border to Uzbekistan to allow fleeing Uzbeks to escape, although it was not clear who controlled
  the frontier. One witness said some women and children had made it across to the Uzbek town of Marhamat, 638 miles
  from Osh, and camps had been set up for those without family in Uzbekistan. A spokeswoman for the Kyrgyz Health
  Ministry said at least 62 people had been killed and 790 wounded in the violence, which is taking place in the southerly
  power base of former president Kurmanbek Bakiyev, deposed in April by a popular revolt.
  "Everywhere is burning: Uzbek homes, restaurants and cafes. The whole town is covered in smoke," local human rights
  worker Dilmurad Ishanov, an ethnic Uzbek, said by telephone from Osh. "We don't need the Kyrgyz authorities. We
  need Russia. We need troops. We need help."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769879 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769880
MetadataSubject: PLS CLEAR: ANNIVERSARY OF IRAN'S DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769880/C05769880.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Pis Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ©state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:27 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769880
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Are you okay w the below?
  Go U.S.!

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769880 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ©state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:27 AM
  To: H
  Subject: Fw: Pis Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  Are you okay w the below?
  Go U.S.!
  Original Message
  From: Schwerin, Daniel B
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Reines, Philippe I; Fuchs, Michael H; Adler, Caroline E
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 11:24:33 2010
  Subject: Pis Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  D and P have cleared on this:
  STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON
  Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  ###
  Drafted:NEA/IR: Cash McCracken ext 7-2569
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769880 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769880 Date: 08/31/2015
  Cleared:NEWIRJBurns/SHorner ok
  NEA/F0JUmbert ok
  DRUHutchings ok
  D(S)GRana ok
  PECatalano ok
  S/PELacey ok
  NSCK Magsamen info
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769880 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769881
MetadataSubject: ICC REVIEW CONFERENCE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Koh, Harold Hongju
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769881/C05769881.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Icc review conference
ExtractedTo: H; Sullivan, Jacob 1
ExtractedFrom: Koh, Harold Hongju <KohHH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:32 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769881
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Madame Secretary:
  On flight home from Kampala, which was exhausting
  Monday, but whatever you hear, the big picture is this:
  I am sending Info memo B5
  To become operational, any crimes of aggression
  1. must still be affirmatively revoted by two thirds votes of states parties
  2 no earlier than 2017
  3 there will be another review conf probably before this goes into effect 4of the two ways of referring crime one goes
  through an exclusive sc trigger;
  5 the other branch has
  A a prior sc filter *and*
  B an ex post sc red light plus
  C requires full vote of 9 judges of pretrial division and D nonconsenting aggressor states can opt out and E prosecutor
  must have reasonable basis for investigation under definition which F has now been significantly narrowed
  I can elaborate Monday
  Best
  Harold
  Harold Hongju Koh
  The Legal Adviser
  U.S. Department of State
  Suite 6421
  2201 C St. NW
  Washington, DC 20520-6421
  202 647 9598 office

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769881 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Koh, Harold Hongju <KohHH@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:32 AM
  To: H; Sullivan, Jacob 1
  Subject: Icc review conference
  Madame Secretary:
  On flight home from Kampala, which was exhausting
  Monday, but whatever you hear, the big picture is this:
  I am sending Info memo B5
  To become operational, any crimes of aggression
  1. must still be affirmatively revoted by two thirds votes of states parties
  2 no earlier than 2017
  3 there will be another review conf probably before this goes into effect 4of the two ways of referring crime one goes
  through an exclusive sc trigger;
  5 the other branch has
  A a prior sc filter *and*
  B an ex post sc red light plus
  C requires full vote of 9 judges of pretrial division and D nonconsenting aggressor states can opt out and E prosecutor
  must have reasonable basis for investigation under definition which F has now been significantly narrowed
  I can elaborate Monday
  Best
  Harold
  Harold Hongju Koh
  The Legal Adviser
  U.S. Department of State
  Suite 6421
  2201 C St. NW
  Washington, DC 20520-6421
  202 647 9598 office
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769881 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769882
MetadataSubject: PLS CLEAR: ANNIVERSAY OF IRAN'S DISPUTED PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769882/C05769882.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769882
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:45 AM
  Re: Pls Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769882 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:45 AM
  Re: Pls Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 11:41:06 2010
  Subject: Re: Pls Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  Original Message ---
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 11:27:02 2010
  Subject: Fw: Pis Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  Are you okay w the below?
  Go U.S.!
  Original Message ----
  From: Schwerin, Daniel B
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Reines, Philippe I; Fuchs, Michael H; Adler, Caroline E
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 11:24:33 2010
  Subject: Pls Clear: Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  D and P have cleared on this:
  STATEMENT BY SECRETARY CLINTON
  Anniversary of Iran's Disputed Presidential Election
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769882 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769882 Date: 08/31/2015
  ###
  Drafted:NEA/IR: Cash McCracken ext 7-2569
  Cleared:NEA/IRJBurns/SHorner ok
  NEA/F0JUmbert ok
  DRUHutchings ok
  D(S)GRana ok
  PECatalano ok
  SPELacey ok
  NSCK Magsamen info
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769882 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769883
MetadataSubject: FLOTILLA INVESTIGATION
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769883/C05769883.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob.) <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 1:15 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769883
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Word is that we're going to announce our response to the Israeli flotilla investigation today. Did Jones or Ross speak
  with you about it?

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769883 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob.) <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 1:15 PM
  To:
  Subject Flotilla investigation
  Word is that we're going to announce our response to the Israeli flotilla investigation today. Did Jones or Ross speak
  with you about it?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769883 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769885
MetadataSubject: CALLS TOMORROW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769885/C05769885.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Calls tomorrow
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 6:55 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769885
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  We have scheduled calls tomorrow with:
  - Swedish Foreign Minister Bildt at 9:00 am
  - Norwegian Foreign Minister Stoere at 10:45 am You have call sheets for both.
  Ok?

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769885 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 6:55 PM
  To:
  Subject: Calls tomorrow
  We have scheduled calls tomorrow with:
  - Swedish Foreign Minister Bildt at 9:00 am
  - Norwegian Foreign Minister Stoere at 10:45 am You have call sheets for both.
  Ok?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769885 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769886
MetadataSubject: S-SAUDABAYEV CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769886/C05769886.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: S-Saudabayev call
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:50 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769886
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769886 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:50 PM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject Fw: S-Saudabayev call
  Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
  Original Message ---
  From: Wells, Alice G
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Krol, George A
  Cc: Holmes, David A
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 20:30:36 2010
  Subject: S-Saudabayev call
  Jake-
  Thx
  Alice G. Wells
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769886 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769887
MetadataSubject: CALLS TOMORROW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769887/C05769887.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Calls tomorrow
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:51 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769887
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: We will connect calls to whitehaven. Unless u want to cancel?
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769887 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:51 PM
  To:
  Subject Re: Calls tomorrow
  We will connect calls to whitehaven. Unless u want to cancel?
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 19:29:58 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls tomorrow
  Ok.
  Original Message ---
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 18:54:41 2010
  Subject: Calls tomorrow
  We have scheduled calls tomorrow with:
  -Swedish Foreign Minister Bildt at 9:00 am
  - Norwegian Foreign Minister Stoere at 10:45 am You have call sheets for both.
  Ok?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769887 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769888
MetadataSubject: CALLS TOMORROW
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: AbedinH@state.gov
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769888/C05769888.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Calls tomorrow
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:56 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769888
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Ok.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769888 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 9:56 PM
  To:
  Subject Re: Calls tomorrow
  Ok.
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:52:42 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls tomorrow
  I may have to do on blackberry
  Original Message
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:50:30 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls tomorrow
  We will connect calls to whitehaven. Unless u want to cancel?
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 19:29:58 2010
  Subject: Re: Calls tomorrow
  Ok.
  Original Message ---
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 18:54:41 2010
  Subject: Calls tomorrow
  We have scheduled calls tomorrow with:
  - Swedish Foreign Minister Bildt at 9:00 am
  - Norwegian Foreign Minister Stoere at 10:45 am You have call sheets for both.
  Ok?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769888 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769890
MetadataSubject: SEAN WILENTZ
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769890/C05769890.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Sean Wilentz
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 10:35 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769890
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: He was with me last weekend. He's left for a week in Greece yesterday on erratic email. What's up?
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769890 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 10:35 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Sean Wilentz
  He was with me last weekend. He's left for a week in Greece yesterday on erratic email. What's up?
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: 'sbwhoeop
  Sent: Sat, Jun 12, 2010 10:31 pm
  Subject: Sean Wilentz
  Is he at your house this weekend?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769890 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769891
MetadataSubject: MCCHRYSTAL IN ROLLING STONE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769891/C05769891.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769891
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Monday, June 21, 2010 9:42 PM
  Fw: McChrystal in Rolling Stone
  R1109McChrystal.pdf
  Attached is the doc, in pdf. I will have it faxed to your house.
  It's for the NEXT issue of Rolling Stone but AP has a copy. We'll need
  Some choice quotes below.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769891 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Attachments:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Monday, June 21, 2010 9:42 PM
  Fw: McChrystal in Rolling Stone
  R1109McChrystal.pdf
  Attached is the doc, in pdf. I will have it faxed to your house.
  It's for the NEXT issue of Rolling Stone but AP has a copy. We'll need
  Some choice quotes below.
  From: Singh, Vikram
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J
  Sent: Mon Jun 21 21:34:17 2010
  Subject: FW: McChrystal in Rolling Stone
  "Part of the problem is structural: The
  Defense Department budget exceeds
  $600 billion a year, while the State Department
  receives only $50 billion. But
  part of the problem is personal: In private,
  Team McChrystal likes to talk shit
  about many of Obama's top people on the
  diplomatic side. One aide calls Jim Jones,
  a retired four-star general and veteran
  of the Cold War, a "clown" who remains
  "stuck in 1985." Politicians like McCain
  and Kerry, says another aide, "turn up,
  have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him
  at the airport press conference, then get
  back for the Sunday talk shows. Frankly,
  it's not very helpful." Only Hillary Clinton
  receives good reviews from McChrystal's
  inner circle. "Hillary had Stan's back during
  the strategic review," says an adviser.
  "She said, 'If Stan wants it, give him what
  he needs.'
  "McCluystal reserves special skepticism
  for Holbrooke, the official in charge
  of reintegrating the Taliban. "The Boss
  says he's like a wounded animal," says a
  member of the general's team. "Holbrooke
  keeps hearing rumors that he's going to
  get fired, so that makes him dangerous.
  He's a brilliant guy, but he just comes in,
  pulls on a lever, whatever he can grasp
  onto. But this is COIN, and you can't just
  have someone yanking on shit."
  At one point on his trip to Paris, Mc-
  Chrystal checks his BlackBerry. "Oh,
  not another e-mail from Holbrooke," he
  gams. "I don't even want to open it." He
  clicks on the message and reads the salutation
  out loud, then stuffs the BlacicBerry
  back in his pocket, not bothering to conceal
  his annoyance.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769891 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769891 Date: 08/31/2015
  "Make sure you don't get any of that
  on your leg," an aide jokes, referring to
  the e-mail
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769891 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769892
MetadataSubject: S-SAUDABAYEV CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-12T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769892/C05769892.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:05 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769892
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Roger
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769892 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 11:05 PM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Roger
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 22:33:53 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I'll do
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:49:40 2010
  Subject: Fw: S-Saudabayev call
  Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
  Original Message
  From: Wells, Alice G
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Krol, George A
  Cc: Holmes, David A
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 20:30:36 2010
  Subject: S-Saudabayev call
  Jake-
  Thx
  Alice G. Wells
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769892 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769893
MetadataSubject: S-SAUDABAYEV CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769893/C05769893.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769893
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sunday, June 13, 2010 10:51 AM
  Abedin, Huma
  Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Will keep you posted.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769893 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sunday, June 13, 2010 10:51 AM
  Abedin, Huma
  Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Will keep you posted.
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacobi
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 22:33:53 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I'll do
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:49:40 2010
  Subject: Fw: S-Saudabayev call
  Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
  Original Message
  From: Wells, Alice G
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Krol, George A
  Cc: Holmes, David A
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 20:30:36 2010
  Subject: S-Saudabayev call
  Jake-
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769893 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769894
MetadataSubject: ROLLING STONE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769894/C05769894.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Rolling Stone
ExtractedTo: H; Huma Abedin
ExtractedFrom: PIR <preines
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:06 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769894
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Aye
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769894 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: PIR <preines
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:06 PM
  To: H; Huma Abedin
  Subject: Re: Rolling Stone
  Aye
  Original Message
  From: Evergreen
  To: PIR
  To: Huma Abedin
  Subject: Rolling Stone
  Sent: Jun 21, 2010 7:01 PM
  Can you get me copy of article about McChrystal that is coming out?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769894 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769895
MetadataSubject: S-SAUDABAYEV CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769895/C05769895.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:18 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769895
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  From John Beyerle ... Perhaps the Russians won't send troops:
  I just called Karasin. He agreed that the situation had gotten worse in Osh and Jalalabad today but said the Russian
  position is still that sending in foreign troops, whether Russian or CSTO, will be counterproductive and lead to more
  violence and bloodshed.
  The IL-76s that flew in to Kant today were the EMERCOM/M4C planes he told me about yesterday; they have
  humanitarian cargo, primarily doctors and medical equipment. I cited the news reports that a battalion of paratroopers
  had gone in -- he said there may be some troops on board to guard the plane or beef up security at Kant, but he was
  firm that at this point Russia has no plans to introduce its own forces in the south. The main objective was to stop the
  violence through peaceful means; Russia had provided the Kyrgyz forces with additional "technical means" for
  accomplishing that. He said they hoped this would help Kyrgyz forces get control of the situation, which was their main
  goal.
  I asked about CSTO planning, and possible UN or OSCE PKFs. He said there is no formal CSTO meeting planned,
  although people are consulting via phone. He repeated their hesitation to see any CSTO deployments. They have not
  yet considered UN or OSCE PKFs, but if the situation continues to deteriorate, he wouldn't exclude the possibility.
  Rushailo is currently in Moscow, but may be sent to Bishkek tomorrow or Tuesday. He agreed to call me if there is any
  major change in the situation on the ground, or regarding force deployments. Tomorrow is a Russian holiday but he'll
  have his cell phone on.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769895 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:18 AM
  To:
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  From John Beyerle ... Perhaps the Russians won't send troops:
  I just called Karasin. He agreed that the situation had gotten worse in Osh and Jalalabad today but said the Russian
  position is still that sending in foreign troops, whether Russian or CSTO, will be counterproductive and lead to more
  violence and bloodshed.
  The IL-76s that flew in to Kant today were the EMERCOM/M4C planes he told me about yesterday; they have
  humanitarian cargo, primarily doctors and medical equipment. I cited the news reports that a battalion of paratroopers
  had gone in -- he said there may be some troops on board to guard the plane or beef up security at Kant, but he was
  firm that at this point Russia has no plans to introduce its own forces in the south. The main objective was to stop the
  violence through peaceful means; Russia had provided the Kyrgyz forces with additional "technical means" for
  accomplishing that. He said they hoped this would help Kyrgyz forces get control of the situation, which was their main
  goal.
  I asked about CSTO planning, and possible UN or OSCE PKFs. He said there is no formal CSTO meeting planned,
  although people are consulting via phone. He repeated their hesitation to see any CSTO deployments. They have not
  yet considered UN or OSCE PKFs, but if the situation continues to deteriorate, he wouldn't exclude the possibility.
  Rushailo is currently in Moscow, but may be sent to Bishkek tomorrow or Tuesday. He agreed to call me if there is any
  major change in the situation on the ground, or regarding force deployments. Tomorrow is a Russian holiday but he'll
  have his cell phone on.
  Original Message ----
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J
  To: 'HDR22@clintonemail.com' <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 10:50:39 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Will keep you posted.
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769895 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769895 Date: 08/31/2015
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 22:33:53 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I'll do
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacobi <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:49:40 2010
  Subject: Fw: S-Saudabayev call
  Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
  Original Message --
  From: Wells, Alice G
  To: Sullivan, Jacob 1; Krol, George A
  Cc: Holmes, David A
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 20:30:36 2010
  Subject: S-Saudabayev call
  Jake-
  \ Thx
  Alice G. Wells
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769895 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769896
MetadataSubject: (AP) THOUSANDS FLEE ETHNIC RIOTS IN KYRGYZSTAN; RUSSIA SENDS TROOPS TO BASE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769896/C05769896.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: (AP) Thousands flee ethnic riots in Kyrgyzstan; Russia sends troops to base
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH©state.gov>
ExtractedCc: NEWS-SCA; NEWS-Russia; NEWS-Mahogany
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:26 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769896
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769896 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH©state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 11:26 AM
  To:
  Subject Fw: (AP) Thousands flee ethnic riots in Kyrgyzstan; Russia sends troops to base
  From: Deyo, Justin A
  To: SES-O_Shift-II
  Cc: NEWS-SCA; NEWS-Russia; NEWS-Mahogany
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 11:17:20 2010
  Subject: (AP) Thousands flee ethnic riots in Kyrgyzstan; Russia sends troops to base
  BISHKEK, Kyrgyzstan (AP) - As minority Uzbeks flee the Central Asian nation of Kyrgyzstan by the thousands, Russia is
  sending in a battalion of paratroopers to protect its air base in the country. More than 100 people have been killed and
  about 1250 wounded in four days of ethnic violence spreading across southern Kyrgyzstan. Doctors and rights activists
  say the actual toll is likely far higher than that official count, because wounded Uzbeks are too afraid of being attacked
  again to go to hospitals. Mobs of ethnic Kyrgyz have been reportedly torching Uzbek villages and neighborhoods,
  slaughtering residents. Authorities in Uzbekistan says more than 75,000 refugees have fled its neighbor. Most are said
  to be women, children and the elderly, and many have gunshot wounds. While the Kremlin has refused Kyrgyzstan's
  request for military help quelling the violence, the Interfax news agency reports Russia has sent about 300 paratroopers
  to reinforce security at its air base. Kyrgyzstan hosts both U.S. and Russian military air bases, but they are in the north,
  away from the ethnic rioting.
  Justin Deyo
  U.S. Department of State
  Operations Center (S/ES-0)
  202-647-1512
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769896 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769897
MetadataSubject: S-SAUDABAYEV
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769897/C05769897.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 12:56 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769897
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: I can talk tonight - whenever is convenient for you.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769897 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 1 <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 12:56 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I can talk tonight - whenever is convenient for you.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacobi
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 11:50:23 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Ok. I'll plan for cal tomorrow.
  Also, I'd like to talk w you before your mtg w Denis and Ben about future ideas. Can you talk tonight? what times would
  be best?
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 10:50:39 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  B5
  Will keep you posted.
  Original Message ----
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacobi
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 22:33:53 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I'll do
  Original Message
  From: Sullivan, Jacobi <Sullivan11@state.gov>
  To: H
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769897 Date: 08/31/2015

  Jake-
  Thx
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769897 Date: 08/31/2015
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:49:40 2010
  Subject: Fw: S-Saudabayev call
  Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
  Original Message --
  From: Wells, Alice G
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Krol, George A
  Cc: Holmes, David A
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 20:30:36 2010
  Subject: S-Saudabayev call
  Alice G. Wells
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769897 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769898
MetadataSubject: S-SAUDABAYEV CALL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769898/C05769898.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacobi <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 1:18 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769898
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Sure could, if it works for you.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769898 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacobi <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 1:18 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Sure could, if it works for you.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 13:08:35 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Could you talk now?
  Original Message ---
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivan1.1@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 12:56:17 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I can talk tonight - whenever is convenient for you.
  Original Message ----
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 11:50:23 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  Ok. I'll plan for cal tomorrow.
  Also, I'd like to talk w you before your mtg w Denis and Ben about future ideas. Can you talk tonight? what times would
  be best?
  Original Message ---
  From: Sullivan, Jacob 1<SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 10:50:39 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769898 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769898 Date: 08/31/2015
  Will keep you posted.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob i
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 22:33:53 2010
  Subject: Re: S-Saudabayev call
  I'll do
  Original Message ----
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivan.11@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 21:49:40 2010
  Subject: Fw: S-Saudabayev call
  Fyi. I think this call makes sense.
  Original Message ---
  From: Wells, Alice G
  To: Sullivan, Jacobi; Krol, George A
  Cc: Holmes, David A
  Sent: Sat Jun 12 20:30:36 2010
  Subject: S-Saudabayev call
  Jake-
  Alice G. Wells
  /Thx
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769898 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769899
MetadataSubject: JUST LEAVING THE POOL AND SEEING YOUR MSSGES - CAN YOU TALK AT 430 PM?
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769899/C05769899.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Just leaving the pool and seeing your mssges - can you talk at 430pm?
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:24 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769899
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769899 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 3:24 PM
  To: H
  Subject: Just leaving the pool and seeing your mssges - can you talk at 430pm?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769899 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769900
MetadataSubject: JUST LEAVING THE POOL AND SEEING YOUR MSSGES - CAN YOU TALK AT 430 PM?
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769900/C05769900.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Just leaving the pool and seeing your mssges - can you talk at 430pm?
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 4:03 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769900
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Yep - speak w/ you then
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769900 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 4:03 PM
  To:
  Subject Re: Just leaving the pool and seeing your mssges - can you talk at 430pm?
  Yep - speak w/ you then
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 15:34:33 2010
  Subject: Re: Just leaving the pool and seeing your mssges - can you talk at 430pm?
  No. Are you free after 9pm?
  Original Message ---
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Sun Jun 13 15:23:53 2010
  Subject: Just leaving the pool and seeing your mssges - can you talk at 430pm?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769900 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769902
MetadataSubject: FW:
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-05T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769902/C05769902.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.goy>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, May 5, 2010 1:08 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769902
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5, B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.goy>
  Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2010 1:08 PM
  To:
  Subject FW:
  From: Bagley, Elizabeth F
  Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 12:13 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769902 Date: 08/31/2015
  Dear Cheryl,
  Best regards,
  Elizabeth
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769902 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769903
MetadataSubject: H: IMPORTANT, MEMO ON UK ELECTION, AM IN LONDON, SID
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-05T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769903/C05769903.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769903
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, May 5, 2010 1:52 PM
  H: IMPORTANT. Memo on UK election, am in London, Sid
  hrc memo British election 050510.docx
  May 5, 2010
  For: Hillary

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769903 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  B6
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Attachments:
  sbwhoeop
  Wednesday, May 5, 2010 1:52 PM
  H: IMPORTANT. Memo on UK election, am in London, Sid
  hrc memo British election 050510.docx
  CONFIDENTIAL
  May 5, 2010
  For: Hillary
  From: Sid
  Re: British election
  First and most important: Do NOT, repeat, NOT, call any prospective winner on either Election Night, May 6,
  or on the next day, Friday, May 7. The result will be unclear. It will not be clear, even perhaps by Friday
  afternoon. Today, the combined polls show Cameron and the Conservatives ahead but not winning an outright
  majority. The latest Guardian poll, out tomorrow, shown me by Alan Rusbridger today, has the Tories falling
  short of a majority of seats. Even if Cameron were to win an outright majority, Brown and Labour will attempt
  to make a deal with Clegg and the Liberal Democrats. Brown remains as Prime Minister unless the Tories win
  outright, which take a long time to determine. Labour and the Lib-Dems will almost certainly gain about 60
  percent of the vote, more or less. Brown will reach out to Clegg to stay in power. The deal will be that Brown
  will approve a referendum on proportional representation giving the LDs much greater representationin future
  elections. That will spell the end forever of the Tories ever coming to power. The Tories see the election in
  apocalyptic terms—and they are not wrong. Brown's weakness heralds the sort of grand progressive
  coalition/alliance that Tony imagined but was never able to attempt between Labour and the LDs. Brown
  offering the referendum would be the first step toward that. In the case of the Tories falling short of an outright
  majority in seats, they will respond as though Brown is acting illegitimately, which he would not be by
  remaining as PM and dealing with Clegg. Informed people are already talking of what might begin to unfold on
  Friday as "Florida." The Tories, backed by the Murdoch press, will attempt to push Labour aside by force
  majeure—something that will not succeed under those circumstances. The Murdochs are almost literally going
  crazy. James Murdoch and hiw wife stormed into the offices of The Independent, not a Murdoch paper, when
  the paper endorsed the LDs and confronted the publisher, screaming in the middle of the newsroom. Murdoch
  would be a big, big loser if Cameron loses. Another possibile outcome is that the Conservatives come up just
  short and attempt their own deal with the DUP to cover the gap in seats. Shaun is on to this potential, has been
  talking to Peter Robinson.
  No matter what, keep your powder dry until the result is crystal clear. Wait.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769903 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769904
MetadataSubject: BRITISH ELECTION
MetadataTo: Hillary
MetadataFrom: Sid
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-05T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769904/C05769904.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Sid
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769904
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769904 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  CONFIDENTIAL
  May 5, 2010
  For: Hillary
  From: Sid
  Re: British election
  First and most important: Do NOT, repeat, NOT, call any prospective winner on either Election
  Night, May 6, or on the next day, Friday, May 7. The result will be unclear. It will not be clear,
  even perhaps by Friday afternoon. Today, the combined polls show Cameron and the
  Conservatives ahead but not winning an outright majority. The latest Guardian poll, out
  tomorrow, shown me by Alan Rusbridger today, has the Tories falling short of a majority of
  seats. Even if Cameron were to win an outright majority, Brown and Labour will attempt to
  make a deal with Clegg and the Liberal Democrats. Brown remains as Prime Minister unless the
  Tories win outright, which take a long time to determine. Labour and the Lib-Dems will almost
  certainly gain about 60 percent of the vote, more or less. Brown will reach out to Clegg to stay in
  power. The deal will be that Brown will approve a referendum on proportional representation
  giving the LDs much greater representationin future elections. That will spell the end forever of
  the Tories ever coming to power. The Tories see the election in apocalyptic terms—and they are
  not wrong. Brown's weakness heralds the sort of grand progressive coalition/alliance that Tony
  imagined but was never able to attempt between Labour and the LDs. Brown offering the
  referendum would be the first step toward that. In the case of the Tories falling short of an
  outright majority in seats, they will respond as though Brown is acting illegitimately, which he
  would not be by remaining as PM and dealing with Clegg. Informed people are already talking
  of what might begin to unfold on Friday as "Florida." The Tories, backed by the Murdoch press,
  will attempt to push Labour aside by force majeure—something that will not succeed under those
  circumstances. The Murdochs are almost literally going crazy. James Murdoch and hiw wife
  stormed into the offices of The Independent, not a Murdoch paper, when the paper endorsed the
  LDs and confronted the publisher, screaming in the middle of the newsroom. Murdoch would be
  a big, big loser if Cameron loses. Another possibile outcome is that the Conservatives come up
  just short and attempt their own deal with the DUP to cover the gap in seats. Shaun is on to this
  potential, has been talking to Peter Robinson.
  No matter what, keep your powder dry until the result is crystal clear. Wait.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769904 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769908
MetadataSubject: STRATEGY SESSIONS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769908/C05769908.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Mills, Cheryl D
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 6:19 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769908
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  I talked to CDM about doing some strategy sessions this week. We discussed trying to do three:
  There are obviously a dozen different ways to do this, and a dozen different configurations. So consider this a strawman
  - we're eager to hear your reactions.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769908 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 6:19 PM
  To:
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject Strategy sessions
  I talked to CDM about doing some strategy sessions this week. We discussed trying to do three:
  There are obviously a dozen different ways to do this, and a dozen different configurations. So consider this a strawman
  - we're eager to hear your reactions.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769908 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769909
MetadataSubject: ROLLING STONE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: PIR
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769909/C05769909.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Rolling Stone
ExtractedFrom: PIR <preines
ExtractedCc: Huma Abedin
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:25 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769909
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  I hadn't heard about this piece until you emailed. It comes out later this week but what's leaked so far is definitely a
  doozie
  Unclear to me why anyone ever cooperate with Rolling Stone

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769909 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: PIR <preines
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:25 PM
  To:
  Cc: Huma Abedin
  Subject: Re: Rolling Stone
  I hadn't heard about this piece until you emailed. It comes out later this week but what's leaked so far is definitely a
  doozie
  Unclear to me why anyone ever cooperate with Rolling Stone
  Original Message
  From: "PIR" <preines
  Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2010 02:05:34
  To: Evergreen<HDR22@clintonemail.com>; Huma Abedin<Huma@clintonemail.com>
  Reply-To: preines
  Subject: Re: Rolling Stone
  Aye
  Original Message
  From: Evergreen
  To: PIR
  To: Huma Abedin
  Subject: Rolling Stone
  Sent: Jun 21, 2010 7:01 PM
  Can you get me copy of article about McChrystal that is coming out?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769909 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769910
MetadataSubject: ROLLING STONE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769910/C05769910.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Rolling Stone
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ©state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:35 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769910
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText: Talked to Ben. Much to report.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769910 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ©state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:35 PM
  To: H
  Subject: Rolling Stone
  Talked to Ben. Much to report.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769910 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769911
MetadataSubject: EARLY NEWS ACCOUNTS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jake
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769911/C05769911.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: early news accounts
ExtractedFrom: Jake Sullivan
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:53 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769911
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Below is McC's statement and some early articles:
  McC Statement:
  I extend my sincerest apology for this profile. It was a mistake
  reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened.
  Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor
  and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far
  short of that standard.
  I have enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his
  national security team, and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting
  this war and I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome.
  Aides to U.S. general in Afghanistan slam Obama:
  report
  20 mins ago
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Aides to the top U.S. general in Afghanistan insulted some of President Barack Obama's closest advisers,
  calling one a "clown" and another a "wounded animal," in an article to be published Friday in Rolling Stone magazine.
  The article also quotes an aide describing the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal's
  "disappointment" with his initial one-on-one meeting with Obama last year.
  Quoting all the McChrystal aides anonymously, the article portrays a split between the U.S. military and Obama's advisers at an
  extremely sensitive moment for the Pentagon, which is fending off criticism of its strategy to turn around the nearly nine-year-old
  Afghan war.
  The Pentagon had no immediate comment about the article, which has been brought to the attention of senior officials.
  It quotes a member of McChrystal's team making jokes about Vice President Joe Biden, who was seen as critical of the general's
  efforts to escalate the conflict and who had favored a more limited counter-terrorism approach.
  "Biden?" the aide was quoted as saying. "Did you say: Bite me?"
  Another aide called White House National Security Adviser Jim Jones, a retired four star general, a "clown" who was "stuck in 1985."
  It quoted an adviser to McChrystal dismissing an early meeting with Obama as a "10-minute photo op."
  "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. The boss was pretty disappointed," the adviser told the magazine.
  McChrystal, a famous workaholic said to sleep just four hours a day, was brought into Afghanistan a year ago after his predecessor
  was pushed out.
  The article portrays his teams as disapproving of the Obama administration, with the exception of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,
  who backed McCrystal's request for additional troops in Afghanistan.
  Some of the strongest criticism was reserved for Richard Holbrooke, Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
  "The boss says he's like a wounded animal," a member of the general's team is quoted as saying. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors
  that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous."
  McChrystal was quoted as saying he felt "betrayed" by the leak of a classified cable from U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl
  Eikenberry last year. The cable raised doubts about sending more troops to shore up an Afghan government already lacking in
  credibility.
  "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal was quoted as saying in the
  article.
  "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so."
  (Editing by Washington World Desk)
  Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
  And from the WSJ:
  0 JUNE 21, 2010, 6:55 PM ET
  McChrystal's Next Offensive?
  Relations between the U.S. military and civilians in the Obama administration have been tense since last year's three-month review of Afghan war strategy, a state of affairs
  unlikely to be helped by a new profile of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the overall commander in Afghanistan, that will appear in Rolling Stone magazine on Friday.
  In the eight-page article, released to reporters on Monday ahead of publication, McChrystal appears to belittle Vice President Joe Biden and accuses Karl Eikenberry, the U.S.
  ambassador to Kabul, of undermining his war plan within the administration.
  Asked by the Rolling Stone reporter about what he now feels of the war strategy advocated by Biden last fall — fewer troops, more drone attacks — the article reports that
  McChrystal and his aides attempted to come up with a good one-liner to dismiss the question. "Are you asking about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal reportedly jokes. "Who's
  that?"
  Later in the article, McChrystal turns more serious when asked about cables sent last fall to Washington by Eikenberry. The cables called into question the major troop increase
  advocated by McChrystal's team and the U.S.'s backing of Afghan President Hamid Karzai — views that the ambassador had not previously raised with McChrystal or his staff.
  "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal is quoted as saying. "Here's one that covers his flank for the history
  books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so."
  The article, titled "The Runaway General," has already caused nervousness inside the Pentagon, where memories are still fresh of another blistering profile that got a top
  commander in hot water: an August 2008 cover story in Esquire <hop://wvav.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon > on Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, then commander of all U.S.
  forces in the Middle East and Central Asia. The article eventually played a part in Fallon's resignation two years ago.
  In that Esquire piece, however, Fallon appeared to directly contradict White House policy on Iran and other parts of the Middle East; the Rolling Stone article makes no such
  allegation, but rather is full of jokey put-downs of important Washington players.
  Comments in the article attributed to anonymous McChrystal aides are particularly harsh towards some senior members of the Obama administration, including National Security
  Adviser James Jones, and other leading politicians, like Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.) and John McCain (R., Ariz). They also make some unflattering references to
  PresidentBarack Obama himself, saying the president didn't seem to know who McChrystal was when he appointed him to run the war early last year.
  Only Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is portrayed as having strongly backed McChrystal's plan for Afghanistan, is singled out for praise by the anonymous McChrystal
  aides.
  A spokesman for McChrystal did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Monday.
  Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
  This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement
  <littp://onlinemsi.com/public/pagg/subscriber agreement.html> and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints all-
  800-843-0008 or visit
  www.djremints.com <htm://www.djrenrints.com>
  Top US Afghan commander mocks Biden: report
  (AFP) — 1 hour ago
  WASHINGTON — The US commander in Afghanistan mocks the vice president and denounces a top diplomat in a magazine interview, while his aides
  speak dismissively of President Barack Obama.
  Tensions between General Stanley McChrystal and the White House are on full display in an unflattering profile in Rolling Stone of the commander of US
  and NATO forces in the Afghan war.
  McChrystal jokes sarcastically about preparing to answer a question referring to Vice President Joe Biden, known as a skeptic of the commander's war
  strategy.
  "Are you asking about Vice President Biden?' McChrystal says with a laugh. 'Who's that?'" the article quotes him as saying.
  "Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say: Bite Me?"
  McChrystal tells the magazine that he felt "betrayed" by the US ambassador to Kabul, Karl Eikenberry, in a White House debate over war strategy last year.
  Referring to a leaked internal memo from Eikenberry that questioned McChrystal's request for more troops, the commander suggested the ambassador had
  tried to protect himself for history's sake.
  "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal tells the magazine.
  "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, ?I told you so."
  Eikenberry, himself a former commander in Afghanisan, had written to the White House saying Afghan President Hamid Karzai was an unreliable partner
  and that a surge of troops could draw the United States into a open-ended quagmire.
  The article revisits the friction between the White House and the military last fall as Obama debated whether to grant McChrystal's request for tens of
  thousands of reinforcements.
  Although Obama in the end granted most of what McChrystal asked for, the strategy review was a difficult time, the general tells the magazine.
  "I found that time painful," McChrystal says. "I was selling an unsellable position."
  An unnamed adviser to McChrystal alleges the general came away unimpressed after a meeting with Obama in the Oval Office a year ago, just after the
  president named him to take over in Afghanistan.
  "It was a 10-minute photo op," the general's adviser says.
  "Obama clearly didn?t know anything about him, who he was.., he didn?t seem very engaged.
  "The boss was pretty disappointed," says the adviser.
  The profile, titled "The Runaway General," portrays his aides as profane and intensely loyal to McChrystal, while arguing the general has seized control over
  the war on the military and diplomatic fronts.
  The four-star general also derides the hard-charging top US envoy to the region, Richard Holbrooke, and complains about a dinner with an unnamed French
  minister during a visit to Paris.
  "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke," McChrystal says, looking at his messages on a mobile phone. "I don't even want to open it."
  In a hotel room in Paris getting ready for a dinner with a French official, McChrystal says: "How'd I get screwed into going to this dinner?"
  "The dinner comes with the position, sir," says his aide, Colonel Charlie Flynn.
  "Hey, Charlie," McChrystal says, "does this come with the position?"
  McChrystal gives him the middle finger.
  Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769911 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: Jake Sullivan
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 10:53 PM
  To:
  Subject: early news accounts
  Below is McC's statement and some early articles:
  McC Statement:
  I extend my sincerest apology for this profile. It was a mistake
  reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened.
  Throughout my career, I have lived by the principles of personal honor
  and professional integrity. What is reflected in this article falls far
  short of that standard.
  I have enormous respect and admiration for President Obama and his
  national security team, and for the civilian leaders and troops fighting
  this war and I remain committed to ensuring its successful outcome.
  Aides to U.S. general in Afghanistan slam Obama:
  report
  20 mins ago
  WASHINGTON (Reuters) — Aides to the top U.S. general in Afghanistan insulted some of President Barack Obama's closest advisers,
  calling one a "clown" and another a "wounded animal," in an article to be published Friday in Rolling Stone magazine.
  The article also quotes an aide describing the commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal's
  "disappointment" with his initial one-on-one meeting with Obama last year.
  Quoting all the McChrystal aides anonymously, the article portrays a split between the U.S. military and Obama's advisers at an
  extremely sensitive moment for the Pentagon, which is fending off criticism of its strategy to turn around the nearly nine-year-old
  Afghan war.
  The Pentagon had no immediate comment about the article, which has been brought to the attention of senior officials.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769911 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769911 Date: 08/31/2015
  It quotes a member of McChrystal's team making jokes about Vice President Joe Biden, who was seen as critical of the general's
  efforts to escalate the conflict and who had favored a more limited counter-terrorism approach.
  "Biden?" the aide was quoted as saying. "Did you say: Bite me?"
  Another aide called White House National Security Adviser Jim Jones, a retired four star general, a "clown" who was "stuck in 1985."
  It quoted an adviser to McChrystal dismissing an early meeting with Obama as a "10-minute photo op."
  "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. The boss was pretty disappointed," the adviser told the magazine.
  McChrystal, a famous workaholic said to sleep just four hours a day, was brought into Afghanistan a year ago after his predecessor
  was pushed out.
  The article portrays his teams as disapproving of the Obama administration, with the exception of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton,
  who backed McCrystal's request for additional troops in Afghanistan.
  Some of the strongest criticism was reserved for Richard Holbrooke, Obama's special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan.
  "The boss says he's like a wounded animal," a member of the general's team is quoted as saying. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors
  that he's going to get fired, so that makes him dangerous."
  McChrystal was quoted as saying he felt "betrayed" by the leak of a classified cable from U.S. Ambassador to Afghanistan Karl
  Eikenberry last year. The cable raised doubts about sending more troops to shore up an Afghan government already lacking in
  credibility.
  "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal was quoted as saying in the
  article.
  "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so."
  (Editing by Washington World Desk)
  Copyright © 2010 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
  And from the WSJ:
  0 JUNE 21, 2010, 6:55 PM ET
  McChrystal's Next Offensive?
  Relations between the U.S. military and civilians in the Obama administration have been tense since last year's three-month review of Afghan war strategy, a state of affairs
  unlikely to be helped by a new profile of Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the overall commander in Afghanistan, that will appear in Rolling Stone magazine on Friday.
  In the eight-page article, released to reporters on Monday ahead of publication, McChrystal appears to belittle Vice President Joe Biden and accuses Karl Eikenberry, the U.S.
  ambassador to Kabul, of undermining his war plan within the administration.
  Asked by the Rolling Stone reporter about what he now feels of the war strategy advocated by Biden last fall — fewer troops, more drone attacks — the article reports that
  McChrystal and his aides attempted to come up with a good one-liner to dismiss the question. "Are you asking about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal reportedly jokes. "Who's
  that?"
  Later in the article, McChrystal turns more serious when asked about cables sent last fall to Washington by Eikenberry. The cables called into question the major troop increase
  advocated by McChrystal's team and the U.S.'s backing of Afghan President Hamid Karzai — views that the ambassador had not previously raised with McChrystal or his staff.
  "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal is quoted as saying. "Here's one that covers his flank for the history
  books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so."
  The article, titled "The Runaway General," has already caused nervousness inside the Pentagon, where memories are still fresh of another blistering profile that got a top
  commander in hot water: an August 2008 cover story in Esquire <hop://wvav.esquire.com/features/fox-fallon > on Adm. William "Fox" Fallon, then commander of all U.S.
  forces in the Middle East and Central Asia. The article eventually played a part in Fallon's resignation two years ago.
  In that Esquire piece, however, Fallon appeared to directly contradict White House policy on Iran and other parts of the Middle East; the Rolling Stone article makes no such
  allegation, but rather is full of jokey put-downs of important Washington players.
  Comments in the article attributed to anonymous McChrystal aides are particularly harsh towards some senior members of the Obama administration, including National Security
  Adviser James Jones, and other leading politicians, like Sens. John Kerry (D., Mass.) and John McCain (R., Ariz). They also make some unflattering references to
  PresidentBarack Obama himself, saying the president didn't seem to know who McChrystal was when he appointed him to run the war early last year.
  Only Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is portrayed as having strongly backed McChrystal's plan for Afghanistan, is singled out for praise by the anonymous McChrystal
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769911 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769911 Date: 08/31/2015
  aides.
  A spokesman for McChrystal did not immediately respond to a request for comment late Monday.
  Copyright 2008 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved
  This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. Distribution and use of this material are governed by our Subscriber Agreement
  <littp://onlinemsi.com/public/pagg/subscriber agreement.html> and by copyright law. For non-personal use or to order multiple copies, please contact Dow Jones Reprints all-
  800-843-0008 or visit
  www.djremints.com <htm://www.djrenrints.com>
  Top US Afghan commander mocks Biden: report
  (AFP) — 1 hour ago
  WASHINGTON — The US commander in Afghanistan mocks the vice president and denounces a top diplomat in a magazine interview, while his aides
  speak dismissively of President Barack Obama.
  Tensions between General Stanley McChrystal and the White House are on full display in an unflattering profile in Rolling Stone of the commander of US
  and NATO forces in the Afghan war.
  McChrystal jokes sarcastically about preparing to answer a question referring to Vice President Joe Biden, known as a skeptic of the commander's war
  strategy.
  "Are you asking about Vice President Biden?' McChrystal says with a laugh. 'Who's that?'" the article quotes him as saying.
  "Biden?' suggests a top adviser. 'Did you say: Bite Me?"
  McChrystal tells the magazine that he felt "betrayed" by the US ambassador to Kabul, Karl Eikenberry, in a White House debate over war strategy last year.
  Referring to a leaked internal memo from Eikenberry that questioned McChrystal's request for more troops, the commander suggested the ambassador had
  tried to protect himself for history's sake.
  "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said anything like that to us before," McChrystal tells the magazine.
  "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, ?I told you so."
  Eikenberry, himself a former commander in Afghanisan, had written to the White House saying Afghan President Hamid Karzai was an unreliable partner
  and that a surge of troops could draw the United States into a open-ended quagmire.
  The article revisits the friction between the White House and the military last fall as Obama debated whether to grant McChrystal's request for tens of
  thousands of reinforcements.
  Although Obama in the end granted most of what McChrystal asked for, the strategy review was a difficult time, the general tells the magazine.
  "I found that time painful," McChrystal says. "I was selling an unsellable position."
  An unnamed adviser to McChrystal alleges the general came away unimpressed after a meeting with Obama in the Oval Office a year ago, just after the
  president named him to take over in Afghanistan.
  "It was a 10-minute photo op," the general's adviser says.
  "Obama clearly didn?t know anything about him, who he was.., he didn?t seem very engaged.
  "The boss was pretty disappointed," says the adviser.
  The profile, titled "The Runaway General," portrays his aides as profane and intensely loyal to McChrystal, while arguing the general has seized control over
  the war on the military and diplomatic fronts.
  The four-star general also derides the hard-charging top US envoy to the region, Richard Holbrooke, and complains about a dinner with an unnamed French
  minister during a visit to Paris.
  "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke," McChrystal says, looking at his messages on a mobile phone. "I don't even want to open it."
  In a hotel room in Paris getting ready for a dinner with a French official, McChrystal says: "How'd I get screwed into going to this dinner?"
  "The dinner comes with the position, sir," says his aide, Colonel Charlie Flynn.
  "Hey, Charlie," McChrystal says, "does this come with the position?"
  McChrystal gives him the middle finger.
  Copyright © 2010 AFP. All rights reserved
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769911 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769912
MetadataSubject: TOP GENERAL IN AFGHAN WAR: US ENVOY BETRAYED ME
MetadataFrom: AP
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769912/C05769912.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769912
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769912 Date: 08/31/2015
  Top General In Afghan War: US Envoy Betrayed
  Me
  RELEASE IN
  FULL
  ANNE GEARA1V, AP National Security Writer
  WASHINGTON (AP) — The top U.S. war commander in Afghanistan told an interviewer he felt
  betrayed by the man the White House chose to be his diplomatic partner, Ambassador Karl Eikenberry.
  An article out this week in "Rolling Stone" magazine depicts Gen. Stanley McChrystal as a lone wolf
  on the outs with many important figures in the Obama administration and unable to convince even
  some of his own soldiers that his strategy can win the war.
  A band of McChrystal's profane, irreverent aides are quoted mocking Vice President Joe Biden and
  Richard Holbrooke, the special U.S. representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
  McChrystal himself is described by an aide as "disappointed" in his first Oval Office meeting with an
  unprepared President Barack Obama. The article says that although McChrystal voted for Obama, the
  two failed to connect from the start. Obama called McChrystal on the carpet last fall for speaking too
  bluntly about his desire for more troops.
  "I found that time painful," McChrystal said in the article, on newsstands Friday. "I was selling an
  unsellable position."
  Obama agreed to dispatch an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan only after months of study
  that many in the military found frustrating. And the White House's troop commitment was coupled
  with a pledge to begin bringing them home in July 2011, in what counterinsurgency strategists advising
  McChrystal regarded as an arbitrary deadline.
  The profile, titled "The Runaway General" emerged from several weeks of interviews and travel with
  McChrystal's tight circle of aides this spring.
  It includes a list of administration figures said to back McChrystal, including Defense Secretary Robert
  Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, and puts Biden at the top of a list of those who
  don't.
  The article claims McChrystal has seized control of the war "by never taking his eye off the real
  enemy: The wimps in the White House."
  Biden initially opposed McChrystal's proposal for additional forces last year. He favored a narrower
  focus on hunting terrorists.
  If Eikenberry had the same doubts, McChrystal said he never expressed them until a leaked internal
  document threw a wild card into the debate over whether to add more troops last November. In the
  document, Eikenberry said Afghan President Hamid Karzai was not a reliable partner for the
  counterinsurgency strategy McChrystal was hired to execute.
  McChrystal said he felt "betrayed" and accused the ambassador of giving himself cover.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769912 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769912 Date: 08/31/2015
  "Here's one that covers his flank for the history books," McChrystal told the magazine. "Now, if we
  fail, they can say 'I told you so.'
  There was no immediate response from Eikenberry. The Associated Press requested comment through
  an aide after business hours on Monday in Kabul.
  Eikenberry remains in his post in Kabul, and although both men publicly say they are friends, their rift
  is on full display.
  McChrystal and Eikenberry, himself a retired Army general, stood as far apart as the speakers' platform
  would allow during a White House news conference last month.
  "Rolling Stone" interviewed troops frustrated by McChrystal's strict rules for combat that are intended
  to reduce the number of civilian casualties.
  At one outpost, a soldier McChrystal had met earlier was killed in a house that the local U.S.
  commander had repeatedly asked to destroy. The request was denied, apparently out of concern that
  razing the house would anger locals whose allegiance the U.S. is trying to win.
  "Does that make any (expletive) sense?" Pfc. Jared Pautsch asks. "We should just drop a (expletive)
  bomb on this place. You sit and ask yourself, 'What are we doing here?'
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769912 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769913
MetadataSubject: ROLLILNG STONE: "THE RUNAWAY GENERAL"
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Reines, Philippe
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769913/C05769913.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Rolling Stone: "The Runaway General"
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Philippe Reines
ExtractedCc: Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 21, 2010 11:25 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769913
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Attached is the story in scanned form. Not sure if you can open/read on your berry, so will make sure Lauren has too

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769913 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Philippe Reines
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 11:25 PM
  To: H
  Cc: Huma Abedin; Jake Sullivan
  Subject: Rolling Stone: "The Runaway General"
  Attachments: R1109McChrystal.pdf
  Attached is the story in scanned form. Not sure if you can open/read on your berry, so will make sure Lauren has too
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769913 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769914
MetadataSubject: ROLLING STONE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-21T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769914/C05769914.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Rolling Stone
ExtractedFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 21, 2010 11:58 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769914
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Oh darn it - sorry I missed your message - I was engrossed in the PSD script.
  If you're still up please call.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769914 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 11:58 PM
  To:
  Subject: Re: Rolling Stone
  Oh darn it - sorry I missed your message - I was engrossed in the PSD script.
  If you're still up please call.
  Original Message ----
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacobi
  Sent: Mon Jun 21 23:16:02 2010
  Subject: Re: Rolling Stone
  can you talk now?
  Original Message ----
  From: Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivann@state.gov>
  To: H
  Sent: Mon Jun 21 22:34:49 2010
  Subject: Rolling Stone
  Talked to Ben. Much to report.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769914 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769915
MetadataSubject: JUST TRIED YOU. AM ON CELL
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-13T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769915/C05769915.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Just tried you. Am on cell
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 9:04 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769915
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769915 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Sunday, June 13, 2010 9:04 PM
  To:
  Subject: Just tried you. Am on cell
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769915 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769918
MetadataSubject: SCHEDULE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Hanley, Monica R
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769918/C05769918.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Schedule
ExtractedTo: H; Huma Abedin
ExtractedFrom: Hanley, Monica R <HanleyMR@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Hanley, Monica R
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:20 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769918
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Will do.
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769918 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Hanley, Monica R <HanleyMR@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:20 AM
  To: H; Huma Abedin
  Subject: Re: Schedule
  Will do.
  Original Message
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com>
  Cc: Hanley, Monica R
  Sent: Tue Jun 22 07:07:24 2010
  Subject: Schedule
  I will need to seEPometime in next week and pis find out when
  aim for July 7 or 8. Thx.
  I'd like to
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769918 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769920
MetadataSubject: SCHEDULE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769920/C05769920.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: Schedule
ExtractedFrom: Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com >
ExtractedCc: 'hanleymr@state.gov'
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:24 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769920
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Will set up
  I'm seeing next week and she's flexible so we can do any morning. B6
  Think may be traveling but will check.

RawText:
  I'd like to
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769920 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Huma Abedin <Huma@clintonemail.com >
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:24 AM
  To:
  Cc: 'hanleymr@state.gov'
  Subject: Re: Schedule
  Will set up
  I'm seeing next week and she's flexible so we can do any morning. B6
  Think may be traveling but will check.
  Original Message
  From: H
  To: Huma Abedin
  Cc: 'hanleymr@state.gov' <hanleymr@state.gov>
  Sent: Tue Jun 22 07:07:24 2010
  Subject: Schedule
  I will need to see
  aim for July 7 or 8. Thx.
  sometime in next week and pis find out when
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769920 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769922
MetadataSubject: MINI SCHEDULE 6/14/10 MONDAY
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769922/C05769922.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Mini Schedule 6/14/10 Monday
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 7:27 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769922
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence *En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am MONDAY MEETING w/ASSISTANT SECRETARIES
  10:00 am Principals Conference Room 7516
  10:05 am DROP-BY U/S BURNS' MEETING w/UAE TRADE MINISTER
  10:10 am SHEIKHA LUBNA al QASIMI Secretary's Conference Room *Official photo at top.
  10:15 am PRE-BRIEF w/AMBASSADOR CdeBACA AND U/S OTERO
  10:25 am Secretary's Office
  10:30 am RELEASE OF 10TH ANNUAL TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS REPORT
  10:50 am Benjamin Franklin Room, 8th Floor
  11:00 am OFFICE TIME
  3:15 pm Secretary's Office
  3:20 pm PHOTO w/ZIA SYED AND FAMILY
  3:30 pm Secretary's Outer Office
  3:40 pm REMARKS TO THE DIPLOMACY CONFERENCE ON SUB-SAHARAN
  4:20 pm AFRICA Loy Henderson Conference Room
  4:30 pm OFFICE TIME
  5:15 pin Secretary's Office
  5:20 pm MEETING w/UNDERSECRETARY BURNS
  6:00 pm Secretary's Office
  6:00 pm DEPART State Department *En route Private Residence
  6:10 pm ARRIVE Private Residence
  ###

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769922 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 7:27 AM
  To:
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: Mini Schedule 6/14/10 Monday
  8:15 am DEPART Private Residence *En route State Department
  8:25 am ARRIVE State Department
  8:25 am PRESIDENTIAL DAILY BRIEFING
  8:30 am Secretary's Office
  8:30 am DAILY SMALL STAFF MEETING
  8:45 am Secretary's Office
  8:45 am DAILY SENIOR STAFF MEETING
  9:15 am Secretary's Conference Room
  9:15 am MONDAY MEETING w/ASSISTANT SECRETARIES
  10:00 am Principals Conference Room 7516
  10:05 am DROP-BY U/S BURNS' MEETING w/UAE TRADE MINISTER
  10:10 am SHEIKHA LUBNA al QASIMI Secretary's Conference Room *Official photo at top.
  10:15 am PRE-BRIEF w/AMBASSADOR CdeBACA AND U/S OTERO
  10:25 am Secretary's Office
  10:30 am RELEASE OF 10TH ANNUAL TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS REPORT
  10:50 am Benjamin Franklin Room, 8th Floor
  11:00 am OFFICE TIME
  3:15 pm Secretary's Office
  3:20 pm PHOTO w/ZIA SYED AND FAMILY
  3:30 pm Secretary's Outer Office
  3:40 pm REMARKS TO THE DIPLOMACY CONFERENCE ON SUB-SAHARAN
  4:20 pm AFRICA Loy Henderson Conference Room
  4:30 pm OFFICE TIME
  5:15 pin Secretary's Office
  5:20 pm MEETING w/UNDERSECRETARY BURNS
  6:00 pm Secretary's Office
  6:00 pm DEPART State Department *En route Private Residence
  6:10 pm ARRIVE Private Residence
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769922 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769924
MetadataSubject: MACK MCLARTY
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769924/C05769924.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 7:28 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769924
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Today June 14th, is his birthday
  202-419-1420 w main
  Asst: Katie
  Asst. Ali cell
  ###

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769924 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 7:28 AM
  To:
  Subject Mack McLarty
  Today June 14th, is his birthday
  202-419-1420 w main
  Asst: Katie
  Asst. Ali cell
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769924 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769927
MetadataSubject: DIANNE FEINSTEIN
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769927/C05769927.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Dianne Feinstein
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Abedin, Huma
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:41 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769927
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  DC)
  w Asst: Daniel
  ###
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769927 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Jiloty, Lauren C <JilotyLC@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 7:41 AM
  To: H
  Cc: Abedin, Huma
  Subject: Dianne Feinstein
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769927 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769931
MetadataSubject: RAHM'S LONG GOODBYE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769931/C05769931.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769931
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD©state.gov>
  Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:14 AM
  FW: Rahm's long goodbye
  Rahm's long goodbye
  By: Glenn Thrush
  June 22, 2010 04:34 AM EDT
  For all the talk about Rahm Emanuel reaching for the "eject" button, the fiery White House
  chief of staff isn't leaving in the immediate future — and could serve well into 2011,
  according to people close to him.
  "It's the opinion in the top levels of the White House that Rahm is going to be here longer
  than many people think," said a senior administration official, speaking on condition of
  anonymity.
  Speculation about Emanuel's departure has been a favorite parlor game for nearly a year
  — stoked by Emanuel's admission that he'd love to run for Chicago mayor (should current'
  Mayor Richard Daley retire, of course), his own kvetching about the rigors of the job,
  withering attacks on him from the left and the right and the fact that the average expiration
  date on a chief of staff is 18 months.
  Emanuel is leaving, but his departure date has proved to be profoundly elastic. Friends
  and co-workers said he vacillates from day to day, sometimes minute to minute. He might
  leave in December after the midterms; or he might stay until next summer, depending on
  whether Daley runs or President Barack Obama asks him to stick around, they said.
  And even as he pines for his native Chicago, Emanuel continues to put down real roots in
  D.C., recently writing the check to enroll his children in the exclusive Maret School in
  Washington through the 2011 school year, according to a person close to Emanuel.
  He's shown few signs of loosening his grip on the tiller — bombarding White House
  staffers with long-distance calls during the first days of the Gulf oil spill even as he
  traveled in Israel for his son's bar mitzvah.
  And in a broader sense, it's hard to imagine Emanuel's huge personality extracted from
  the political, journalistic and bar stool life of Obama's Washington.
  Take the last game of last week's NBA Finals, when any American voter could wander
  into Tunnicliff's Tavern on Capitol Hill and witness one of the most powerful men in the
  nation egging on the Boston Celtics — screaming at the flat-screen TV, actually — joined
  by a merry band that included Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.); Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.);
  Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.); and a pair of
  favorite reporters from The New York Times and The Washington Post.
  Despite a British tabloid story asserting that Emanuel is sick of Obama's "idealism" and is
  racing for the exit, the former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman
  still loves the attention and power of his current job and hasn't made up his mind when
  he's leaving, people who know him said.
  "This is BS. And if you need it for translation, it is baseless," Emanuel said in a statement
  pushing back against a story in the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph portraying Emanuel as restless!
  and fed up.
  Replacing Emanuel, when he eventually goes, will be no easy task for Obama and the
  small clique of close advisers led by Pete Rouse, David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett.
  For one thing, Obama and company need to know what the post-November political
  landscape looks like before picking a successor: If Republicans take back one or more
  house of Congress, the new chief of staff will need to know how to leverage executive
  power against a hostile Hill; if Democrats retain their majorities, Emanuel's successor will
  need some of his legislative skills.
  Barring a major course correction, Obama, who prizes loyalty and familiarity, isn't likely to
  reach too far outside his inner circle, advisers said.
  Still, the president is increasingly cognizant of his reputation for insularity and would quite
  likely give a serious look at respected former Clinton chiefs of staff Leon Panetta, currenW
  head of the CIA, or John Podesta, who runs the Center for American Progress, a major
  liberal think tank with close ties to the administration.
  Rouse, a senior adviser who served as Obama's Senate chief of staff, is considered the
  best pure manager in the White House and a logical choice to replace Emanuel, according
  to a half-dozen.administration officials and consultants.
  But Rouse's colleagues say the quiet 60-year-old insider loves his work, the Grateful Dead
  and his cats — but despises the spotlight and would most likely turn down the job unless
  Obama insisted.
  "The key thing about Pete is that the president trusts him and would feel very, very
  comfortable with him in charge," said a Democratic consultant who knows both men well.
  "But he probably won't take it."
  One possible candidate — deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, Emanuel's political go-to guy
  — is likely to play a major role in Obama's 2012 reelection campaign and is expected to
  move to Chicago sometime next year.
  In Messina's absence, another Emanuel favorite — Deputy National Security Adviser Tom
  Donilon — has emerged as a possible successor, according to people close to the
  situation.
  Obama has been impressed by Donilon's presentations at the President's Daily Briefing,
  and the Rhode Island native has a wide variety of political and governmental experience,
  serving as a congressional liaison under President Jimmy Carter, chief State Department
  spokesman under President Bill Clinton and a campaign adviser who helped Obama
  prepare for debates against John McCain.
  One major Donilon drawback: He served as an executive vice president for Fannie Mae,
  the bailed-out mortgage giant, and reportedly lobbied against stronger regulatory
  oversight.
  David Plouffe, Obama's 2008 campaign manager, is another contender, with a reputation
  for discipline, team building and solid management skills. But Plouffe has been reluctant to
  settle down in Washington, is earning a stellar living as a consultant and hates the press.
  Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is also a possible successor, even though
  his nomination for Health and Human Services secretary was scuttled by revelations he
  failed to report limo rides paid for by a corporate client.
  Another White House aide, Phil Schiliro, is a favorite of Obama's for his legislative savvy
  and political instincts. But critics said he lacks the range of policy and political experience
  that other candidates possess, and that his mastery of the Hill won't mean much if
  Democrats surrender their majorities in either house.
  Then there's Ron Klain, 49, Vice President Joe Biden's brainy and politically astute chief
  of staff, who is said to be intensely interested in making the move from the Eisenhower
  Executive Office Building to the West Wing.
  Klain — who also served as Al Gore's chief of staff — is well-regarded inside the White
  House. Plus, he's got a touch of star power: Kevin Spacey played him in the HBO movie
  "Recount," about his role in guiding the Gore campaign through the 2000 Florida recount.
  Klain's downside: He's essentially an outsider who has yet to develop a serious rapport
  with the president, according to insiders.
  C 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769931 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN
  FULL
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject:
  Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD©state.gov>
  Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:14 AM
  FW: Rahm's long goodbye
  Rahm's long goodbye
  By: Glenn Thrush
  June 22, 2010 04:34 AM EDT
  For all the talk about Rahm Emanuel reaching for the "eject" button, the fiery White House
  chief of staff isn't leaving in the immediate future — and could serve well into 2011,
  according to people close to him.
  "It's the opinion in the top levels of the White House that Rahm is going to be here longer
  than many people think," said a senior administration official, speaking on condition of
  anonymity.
  Speculation about Emanuel's departure has been a favorite parlor game for nearly a year
  — stoked by Emanuel's admission that he'd love to run for Chicago mayor (should current'
  Mayor Richard Daley retire, of course), his own kvetching about the rigors of the job,
  withering attacks on him from the left and the right and the fact that the average expiration
  date on a chief of staff is 18 months.
  Emanuel is leaving, but his departure date has proved to be profoundly elastic. Friends
  and co-workers said he vacillates from day to day, sometimes minute to minute. He might
  leave in December after the midterms; or he might stay until next summer, depending on
  whether Daley runs or President Barack Obama asks him to stick around, they said.
  And even as he pines for his native Chicago, Emanuel continues to put down real roots in
  D.C., recently writing the check to enroll his children in the exclusive Maret School in
  Washington through the 2011 school year, according to a person close to Emanuel.
  He's shown few signs of loosening his grip on the tiller — bombarding White House
  staffers with long-distance calls during the first days of the Gulf oil spill even as he
  traveled in Israel for his son's bar mitzvah.
  And in a broader sense, it's hard to imagine Emanuel's huge personality extracted from
  the political, journalistic and bar stool life of Obama's Washington.
  Take the last game of last week's NBA Finals, when any American voter could wander
  into Tunnicliff's Tavern on Capitol Hill and witness one of the most powerful men in the
  nation egging on the Boston Celtics — screaming at the flat-screen TV, actually — joined
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769931 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769931 Date: 08/31/2015
  by a merry band that included Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.); Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.);
  Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.); and a pair of
  favorite reporters from The New York Times and The Washington Post.
  Despite a British tabloid story asserting that Emanuel is sick of Obama's "idealism" and is
  racing for the exit, the former Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chairman
  still loves the attention and power of his current job and hasn't made up his mind when
  he's leaving, people who know him said.
  "This is BS. And if you need it for translation, it is baseless," Emanuel said in a statement
  pushing back against a story in the U.K.'s Daily Telegraph portraying Emanuel as restless!
  and fed up.
  Replacing Emanuel, when he eventually goes, will be no easy task for Obama and the
  small clique of close advisers led by Pete Rouse, David Axelrod and Valerie Jarrett.
  For one thing, Obama and company need to know what the post-November political
  landscape looks like before picking a successor: If Republicans take back one or more
  house of Congress, the new chief of staff will need to know how to leverage executive
  power against a hostile Hill; if Democrats retain their majorities, Emanuel's successor will
  need some of his legislative skills.
  Barring a major course correction, Obama, who prizes loyalty and familiarity, isn't likely to
  reach too far outside his inner circle, advisers said.
  Still, the president is increasingly cognizant of his reputation for insularity and would quite
  likely give a serious look at respected former Clinton chiefs of staff Leon Panetta, currenW
  head of the CIA, or John Podesta, who runs the Center for American Progress, a major
  liberal think tank with close ties to the administration.
  Rouse, a senior adviser who served as Obama's Senate chief of staff, is considered the
  best pure manager in the White House and a logical choice to replace Emanuel, according
  to a half-dozen.administration officials and consultants.
  But Rouse's colleagues say the quiet 60-year-old insider loves his work, the Grateful Dead
  and his cats — but despises the spotlight and would most likely turn down the job unless
  Obama insisted.
  "The key thing about Pete is that the president trusts him and would feel very, very
  comfortable with him in charge," said a Democratic consultant who knows both men well.
  "But he probably won't take it."
  One possible candidate — deputy chief of staff Jim Messina, Emanuel's political go-to guy
  — is likely to play a major role in Obama's 2012 reelection campaign and is expected to
  move to Chicago sometime next year.
  In Messina's absence, another Emanuel favorite — Deputy National Security Adviser Tom
  Donilon — has emerged as a possible successor, according to people close to the
  situation.
  Obama has been impressed by Donilon's presentations at the President's Daily Briefing,
  and the Rhode Island native has a wide variety of political and governmental experience,
  serving as a congressional liaison under President Jimmy Carter, chief State Department
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769931 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769931 Date: 08/31/2015
  spokesman under President Bill Clinton and a campaign adviser who helped Obama
  prepare for debates against John McCain.
  One major Donilon drawback: He served as an executive vice president for Fannie Mae,
  the bailed-out mortgage giant, and reportedly lobbied against stronger regulatory
  oversight.
  David Plouffe, Obama's 2008 campaign manager, is another contender, with a reputation
  for discipline, team building and solid management skills. But Plouffe has been reluctant to
  settle down in Washington, is earning a stellar living as a consultant and hates the press.
  Former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle is also a possible successor, even though
  his nomination for Health and Human Services secretary was scuttled by revelations he
  failed to report limo rides paid for by a corporate client.
  Another White House aide, Phil Schiliro, is a favorite of Obama's for his legislative savvy
  and political instincts. But critics said he lacks the range of policy and political experience
  that other candidates possess, and that his mastery of the Hill won't mean much if
  Democrats surrender their majorities in either house.
  Then there's Ron Klain, 49, Vice President Joe Biden's brainy and politically astute chief
  of staff, who is said to be intensely interested in making the move from the Eisenhower
  Executive Office Building to the West Wing.
  Klain — who also served as Al Gore's chief of staff — is well-regarded inside the White
  House. Plus, he's got a touch of star power: Kevin Spacey played him in the HBO movie
  "Recount," about his role in guiding the Gore campaign through the 2000 Florida recount.
  Klain's downside: He's essentially an outsider who has yet to develop a serious rapport
  with the president, according to insiders.
  C 2010 Capitol News Company, LLC
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769931 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769933
MetadataSubject: IMG00211-20100614-1158.JPG
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769933/C05769933.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:33 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769933
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769933 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:33 PM
  To:
  Subject IMG00211-20100614-1158.jpg
  Attachments: IMG00211-20100614-1158.jpg
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769933 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769934
MetadataSubject: IMG00211-20100614-1205.JPG
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Abedin, Huma
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769934/C05769934.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedFrom: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:34 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769934
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. CO5769934 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Abedin, Huma <AbedinH@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 2:34 PM
  To:
  Subject IMG00214-20100614-1205.jpg
  Attachments: IMG00214-20100614-1205jpg
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769934 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769936
MetadataSubject: MAX FROM ISRAEL: DECONSTRUCTION OF PROPAGANDA AND MEDIA
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769936/C05769936.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Max from Israel: deconstruction of propaganda and media
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 9:19 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769936
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/06/the-israeli-medias-flotilla-fail/
  The Israeli Media's Flotilla Fail
  On 06.22.10, By Max Blumenthal
  My summaty of the Israeli media's shambolic performance following the flotilla massacre was originally published here in
  Hebrew at Dvorit Shargal's excellent Israeli media blog, Velvet Underground. The English version follows:
  If the raid of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla was a disaster for the Israel Defense Forces, its aftermath demonstrated an
  equally bewildering performance by the Israeli media. The IDF Spokesman's Office churned out one misleading claim
  after another, each one more implausible than the next, seeking to implant in the public's mind a version of events that
  bore little relation to reality. To a degree, this was to be expected; but it was startling to see how some of Israel's most
  respected reporters lined up to serve as military stenographers, barely challenging the IDF's rapidly changing versions of
  events. IDF claims about the flotilla passengers' links to Al Qaida, anti-Semitic statements shouted at the Israeli Navy, and
  their terrorist intentions were eagerly broadcast by the Israeli media without a second thought. When independent
  reporters forced the IDF to retract or "clarify" all of these claims, Israeli news outlets refused to correct their errors, or
  covered them up without acknowledgment.
  It so happened that I arrived in Israel for a research trip the day after the flotilla raid. As a result, I was able to do
  something which I always thought to be a very basic journalistic practice, so basic it's supposed to be applied routinely:
  Asking an implicated party in a story to produce evidence for its claims. What I found bewildering is that at least judging
  from Israeli media reports, few, if any, mainstream reporters applied this practice, and when a visiting colleague did their
  job for them – nobody bothered to correct or withdraw their original report.
  On June 2, the IDF disseminated a press release entitled, "Attackers of the IDF soldiers found to be Al Qaeda
  mercenaries." The accusation was not accompanied by any conclusive evidence — the IDF reported that Mavi Marmara
  passengers were equipped with night-vision goggles (gasp!). This did not stop Yedioth's Ron Ben-Yishai, who was
  embedded with the Navy commandos, from amplifying the baseless charge. Citing an "interrogation" of Marmara
  passengers — "lynchers," he called them — Ben-Yishai wrote the same day, "Some among the [flotilla passengers] are
  believed to have ties with World Jihad groups, mainly Al Qaeda." The article made no reference to any efforts on part of
  Ben Yishai to investigate this claim, nor did he seem to think to ask why the IDF was about to release dangerous
  operatives of Osama Bin Laden — presumably they would attack again, wouldn't they? •
  On June 3, Israeli journalist Lia Tarachansky of the Real News Network and I placed calls to the IDF Spokesman's Office
  to demand further evidence of the Marmara's Al Qaeda ties. We received identical responses from spokespeople from the
  IDF's Israel and North America desks: "We don't have any evidence. The press release was based on information from
  the National Security Council." Hours later, the IDF retracted its claim, changing the title of its press release to, "Attackers
  of IDF Soldiers Found Without Identification Papers." Despite the official retraction, Ben-Yishai's article remains
  uncorrected.
  On June 4, the IDF released an audio clip purporting to consist of transmissions between the Mavi Marmara and a Naval
  warship. "Go back to Aushwitz!" a Marmara passenger shouted, according to the IDF. YNet and Haaretz reported on and
  reproduced the audio clip without investigating its authenticity. Forget that the voice uttering the anti-Semitic slur sounded
  like a mentally disturbed teenager; had reporters performed a cursory search of the IDF Spokeman's Office website, they
  would have found a longer clip released on May 31 that featured a dramatically different exchange with the Marmara with
  no mention of Auschwitz. Further, the voice of flotilla organizer Huwaida Arraf was featured in the "Aushwitz" clip, yet Arraf
  was not aboard the Marmara (she was on the Challenger One). Could the IDF have doctored audio to exploit public
  hysteria surrounding the issue of anti-Semitism?
  On my blog, I pointed out the discrepancies in the IDF's footage and raised the question of doctoring. The next day, the
  IDF conceded that it had in fact doctored the footage, releasing a "clarification" and a new clip claiming to consist of the
  "full" exchange between the Navy and the flotilla. Unfortunately, the authenticity of the new clip was impossible to verify.
  Despite the IDF's admission, YNet and Haaretz have not corrected their original reports, though Haaretz has at least
  altered its headline. Once the doctoring was exposed, the New York Times covered the episode in detail, directing
  international attention to the triumph of independent online reporting and the apparent failure of Israel's parochial press
  corps.
  On June 7, Haaretz's Anshel Pfeffer reported on an IDF press release claiming without evidence that five flotilla
  passengers had links to international terror. The press release was larded with highly implausible claims, including that
  Ken O'Keefe, who runs an aid organization with Tony Blair's sister-in-law, was planning to train a Hamas commando unit
  in the Gaza Strip. When I called the IDF Spokesman's Office, I learned that once again, no evidence was available to
  support their press release. "There is very limited intelligence we can give in this specific case," Sgt. Chen Arad told me.
  "Obviously I'm unable to give you more information." Did Pfeffer demand more evidence? If he did and was answered in
  the same manner as I did, why did Haaretz publish an unsubstantiated spin as fact?
  Joined by Haaretz military correspondents Avi Isacharoff and Amos Harel, Pfeffer became a channel for another daytime
  deception by the IDF. On May 31, the three reporters produced an article based exclusively on testimony from Naval
  commandos — the flotilla passengers' side of the story was ignored — claiming they had faced live fire and lynching
  attempts from Marmara passengers. Since the story was published, the IDF has produced scant evidence to support
  either accusation. The article was accompanied by a suspicious photo from the IDF Spokesman's Office depicting a
  bearded Muslim man brandishing a knife and surrounded by photojournalists. Daylight beamed in from a window behind
  the man. Haaretz's caption, which was sourced to the IDF, asserted that the photo was taken "after" the commandos had
  boarded the Marmara. However, the commandos raided the ship at night, while the photo was taken during the day. Once
  again, the IDF's story was fishy.
  I called Sgt. Arad at the IDF Spokesman's Office to investigate. He told me he had no evidence to support the photo's
  questionable caption. Soon after our phone conversation, Haaretz quietly altered the caption, removing its claim that the
  photo was taken "after" the commando raid. For nearly a week, the false photo caption had remained intact. Why did
  Haaretz suddenly change it? The only plausible explanation is that the paper received a tip from the IDF Spokesman's
  Office. If true, the tip-off suggests a scandalous level of coordination between the Israeli military and the country's media.
  In the wake of the flotilla raid, Israeli journalists had a unique opportunity to lead the global media's investigation into the
  bloodbath that occurred on the deck of the Mavi Marmara. After all, no one had better access to the military or the
  eyewitnesses aboard the flotilla. Instead, too many among the Israeli press corps allowed themselves to be conscripted
  into the IDF's hapless information war, leaving the important task of investigating the raid to independent reporters who
  remembered to view claims by any nation's military with extreme skepticism.
  So why do well-connected, experienced reporters follow the IDF baton so willingly, and fail to follow up when IDF claims
  are retracted? Is it simple bias, a desire to present their military in the best possible light, a desire so strong they abandon
  their duty to their readers to verify their information? Are they afraid of sanctions, of losing contacts and access to
  information? Do they fear personal reprisals? Their readers, and the world media that still relies on Israeli journalism as a
  vital source of information, need to know.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769936 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 9:19 AM
  Subject: Max from Israel: deconstruction of propaganda and media
  http://maxblumenthal.com/2010/06/the-israeli-medias-flotilla-fail/
  The Israeli Media's Flotilla Fail
  On 06.22.10, By Max Blumenthal
  My summaty of the Israeli media's shambolic performance following the flotilla massacre was originally published here in
  Hebrew at Dvorit Shargal's excellent Israeli media blog, Velvet Underground. The English version follows:
  If the raid of the Gaza Freedom Flotilla was a disaster for the Israel Defense Forces, its aftermath demonstrated an
  equally bewildering performance by the Israeli media. The IDF Spokesman's Office churned out one misleading claim
  after another, each one more implausible than the next, seeking to implant in the public's mind a version of events that
  bore little relation to reality. To a degree, this was to be expected; but it was startling to see how some of Israel's most
  respected reporters lined up to serve as military stenographers, barely challenging the IDF's rapidly changing versions of
  events. IDF claims about the flotilla passengers' links to Al Qaida, anti-Semitic statements shouted at the Israeli Navy, and
  their terrorist intentions were eagerly broadcast by the Israeli media without a second thought. When independent
  reporters forced the IDF to retract or "clarify" all of these claims, Israeli news outlets refused to correct their errors, or
  covered them up without acknowledgment.
  It so happened that I arrived in Israel for a research trip the day after the flotilla raid. As a result, I was able to do
  something which I always thought to be a very basic journalistic practice, so basic it's supposed to be applied routinely:
  Asking an implicated party in a story to produce evidence for its claims. What I found bewildering is that at least judging
  from Israeli media reports, few, if any, mainstream reporters applied this practice, and when a visiting colleague did their
  job for them – nobody bothered to correct or withdraw their original report.
  On June 2, the IDF disseminated a press release entitled, "Attackers of the IDF soldiers found to be Al Qaeda
  mercenaries." The accusation was not accompanied by any conclusive evidence — the IDF reported that Mavi Marmara
  passengers were equipped with night-vision goggles (gasp!). This did not stop Yedioth's Ron Ben-Yishai, who was
  embedded with the Navy commandos, from amplifying the baseless charge. Citing an "interrogation" of Marmara
  passengers — "lynchers," he called them — Ben-Yishai wrote the same day, "Some among the [flotilla passengers] are
  believed to have ties with World Jihad groups, mainly Al Qaeda." The article made no reference to any efforts on part of
  Ben Yishai to investigate this claim, nor did he seem to think to ask why the IDF was about to release dangerous
  operatives of Osama Bin Laden — presumably they would attack again, wouldn't they? •
  On June 3, Israeli journalist Lia Tarachansky of the Real News Network and I placed calls to the IDF Spokesman's Office
  to demand further evidence of the Marmara's Al Qaeda ties. We received identical responses from spokespeople from the
  IDF's Israel and North America desks: "We don't have any evidence. The press release was based on information from
  the National Security Council." Hours later, the IDF retracted its claim, changing the title of its press release to, "Attackers
  of IDF Soldiers Found Without Identification Papers." Despite the official retraction, Ben-Yishai's article remains
  uncorrected.
  On June 4, the IDF released an audio clip purporting to consist of transmissions between the Mavi Marmara and a Naval
  warship. "Go back to Aushwitz!" a Marmara passenger shouted, according to the IDF. YNet and Haaretz reported on and
  reproduced the audio clip without investigating its authenticity. Forget that the voice uttering the anti-Semitic slur sounded
  like a mentally disturbed teenager; had reporters performed a cursory search of the IDF Spokeman's Office website, they
  would have found a longer clip released on May 31 that featured a dramatically different exchange with the Marmara with
  no mention of Auschwitz. Further, the voice of flotilla organizer Huwaida Arraf was featured in the "Aushwitz" clip, yet Arraf
  was not aboard the Marmara (she was on the Challenger One). Could the IDF have doctored audio to exploit public
  hysteria surrounding the issue of anti-Semitism?
  On my blog, I pointed out the discrepancies in the IDF's footage and raised the question of doctoring. The next day, the
  IDF conceded that it had in fact doctored the footage, releasing a "clarification" and a new clip claiming to consist of the
  "full" exchange between the Navy and the flotilla. Unfortunately, the authenticity of the new clip was impossible to verify.
  Despite the IDF's admission, YNet and Haaretz have not corrected their original reports, though Haaretz has at least
  altered its headline. Once the doctoring was exposed, the New York Times covered the episode in detail, directing
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769936 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769936 Date: 08/31/2015
  international attention to the triumph of independent online reporting and the apparent failure of Israel's parochial press
  corps.
  On June 7, Haaretz's Anshel Pfeffer reported on an IDF press release claiming without evidence that five flotilla
  passengers had links to international terror. The press release was larded with highly implausible claims, including that
  Ken O'Keefe, who runs an aid organization with Tony Blair's sister-in-law, was planning to train a Hamas commando unit
  in the Gaza Strip. When I called the IDF Spokesman's Office, I learned that once again, no evidence was available to
  support their press release. "There is very limited intelligence we can give in this specific case," Sgt. Chen Arad told me.
  "Obviously I'm unable to give you more information." Did Pfeffer demand more evidence? If he did and was answered in
  the same manner as I did, why did Haaretz publish an unsubstantiated spin as fact?
  Joined by Haaretz military correspondents Avi Isacharoff and Amos Harel, Pfeffer became a channel for another daytime
  deception by the IDF. On May 31, the three reporters produced an article based exclusively on testimony from Naval
  commandos — the flotilla passengers' side of the story was ignored — claiming they had faced live fire and lynching
  attempts from Marmara passengers. Since the story was published, the IDF has produced scant evidence to support
  either accusation. The article was accompanied by a suspicious photo from the IDF Spokesman's Office depicting a
  bearded Muslim man brandishing a knife and surrounded by photojournalists. Daylight beamed in from a window behind
  the man. Haaretz's caption, which was sourced to the IDF, asserted that the photo was taken "after" the commandos had
  boarded the Marmara. However, the commandos raided the ship at night, while the photo was taken during the day. Once
  again, the IDF's story was fishy.
  I called Sgt. Arad at the IDF Spokesman's Office to investigate. He told me he had no evidence to support the photo's
  questionable caption. Soon after our phone conversation, Haaretz quietly altered the caption, removing its claim that the
  photo was taken "after" the commando raid. For nearly a week, the false photo caption had remained intact. Why did
  Haaretz suddenly change it? The only plausible explanation is that the paper received a tip from the IDF Spokesman's
  Office. If true, the tip-off suggests a scandalous level of coordination between the Israeli military and the country's media.
  In the wake of the flotilla raid, Israeli journalists had a unique opportunity to lead the global media's investigation into the
  bloodbath that occurred on the deck of the Mavi Marmara. After all, no one had better access to the military or the
  eyewitnesses aboard the flotilla. Instead, too many among the Israeli press corps allowed themselves to be conscripted
  into the IDF's hapless information war, leaving the important task of investigating the raid to independent reporters who
  remembered to view claims by any nation's military with extreme skepticism.
  So why do well-connected, experienced reporters follow the IDF baton so willingly, and fail to follow up when IDF claims
  are retracted? Is it simple bias, a desire to present their military in the best possible light, a desire so strong they abandon
  their duty to their readers to verify their information? Are they afraid of sanctions, of losing contacts and access to
  information? Do they fear personal reprisals? Their readers, and the world media that still relies on Israeli journalism as a
  vital source of information, need to know.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769936 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769937
MetadataSubject: NOTE FROM DICK GEPHARDT
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-05T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769937/C05769937.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Note from Dick Gephardt
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Wednesday, May 5, 2010 10:20 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769937
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  See below — you fine with this?
  cdm

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769937 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Wednesday, May 5, 2010 10:20 PM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Note from Dick Gephardt
  See below — you fine with this?
  cdm
  From: Gordon, Philip H
  Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 10:00 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob 3
  Subject: Re: Note from Dick Gephardt
  Recommend she do it. In fact we had arranged for a meeting in March but Ms. Boyner's trip was cancelled. We can send
  up a new meeting request.
  From: Mills, Cheryl D
  To: Sullivan, Jacob J; Gordon, Philip H
  Sent: Wed May 05 21:18:07 2010
  Subject: FW: Note from Dick Gephardt
  Thoughts on this?
  From: Dick Gephardt B6
  Sent: Wednesday, May 05, 2010 4:05 PM
  To: Mills, Cheryl D
  Subject: Note from Dick Gephardt
  Dear Cheryl:
  I have been asked by the Turkish Embassy, who I represent, to request a meeting with Secretary Clinton for Mrs. Umit
  Boyner, a prominent Turkish business woman. Such a meeting could be whenever and wherever you determine most
  convenient for the Secretary — either in Washington, DC or Turkey.
  As you will see from the biographical information below, Mrs. Boyner has had a distinguished career as a
  businesswoman, and she has also devoted time to philanthropy as well. Mrs. Boyner was recently selected to be the
  chair person of the board of one of the most prominent Turkish business organizations, the Turkish Industrialists' and
  Businessmen's Association (TUSIAD) — an organization comparable to the Business Roundtable. I have also attached a
  document providing additional background information on TUSIAD.
  Mrs. Umit is a great admirer of Secretary Clinton's and would be extremely honored to be able to meet with her. I know
  the Secretary is extremely busy, but I hope she can find a window to meet with Mrs. Urnit. Thanks for all you help and
  my personal regards to Secretary Clinton.
  Best,
  Dick
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769937 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769937 Date: 08/31/2015
  Brief Biography of Umit Boyner
  Mrs. Umit Boyner, is currently the chair of the Turkish Industrialists' and Businessmen's Association (TUSIAD) Board of
  Directors and head of the Country Communication Fund. Mrs. Boyner was selected to chair TUSIAD's Board at the 40th
  General Assembly meeting held in Istanbul on January 21, 2010.
  Born in 1963, Mrs. Boyner received a BA degree in Economics from the University of Rochester in the US. She began her
  professional career in 1985 at Chemical Mitsui Bank, followed by senior positions at the finance departments of several
  companies. In 1996 she became the Vice-President in charge of Finance at Boyner Group. In 2002 she became a board
  member overseeing the finances and investments of the group.
  Mrs. Boyner has been serving on the Board of TUSIAD since 2005, initially as a board member in charge of the External
  Communication Commission, later as a vice-chair. Mrs. Boyner also devotes her time to various NGOs such as the
  Education Volunteers Foundation of Turkey (TEGV), Turkish Institute of Nautical Archaeology (TINA), and Tohum Autism
  Foundation. She was also the President of the Corporate Volunteer Association for two years, and a founding member
  and vice-president for four years of the Women Entrepreneurs Association (KAGIDER). Since 2008 she has been serving
  on the Middle East Advisory Board of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
  Mrs. Boyner is married and has two children.
  TUSIAD's new Board of Directors consists of the following individuals:
  Umit Boyner: Chairperson
  Haluk Dincer: Vice-Chair
  Tayfun Bayazit: Vice-Chair
  Cansen Basaran Synnes: Member
  Lucien Arkas: Member
  Mehmet Ali Aydinlar: Member
  Erman Ilicak: Member
  Ali Kibar: Member
  Volkan Vural: Member
  Muharrem Yilmaz: Member
  Zafer Ali Yavan: Member, Secretary General
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769937 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769938
MetadataSubject: SYRIA TRIP IN THE SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769938/C05769938.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: FW: Syria Trip in the San Francisco Chronicle
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 9:45 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769938
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769938 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 9:45 AM
  To:
  Subject: FW: Syria Trip in the San Francisco Chronicle
  From: Cohen, Jared A
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 8:32 AM
  To: Slaughter, Anne-Marie; Chollet, Derek H; Burns, William 3; Feltman, Jeffrey D; Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob 3;
  Jentleson, Bruce W; Ross, Alec 3; Crowley, Philip 3; Djerassi, Alexander M
  Subject: Fw: Syria Trip in the San Francisco Chronicle
  Fyi
  Jared Cohen
  Policy Planning Staff
  Office of the Secretary of State
  U.S. Department of State
  Office Tel: 202-647-0531
  Cell:
  Twitter
  This email is unclassified
  From: Jared Cohen
  To: Cohen, Jared A; alec.ross
  Sent: Tue Jun 22 08:23:49 2010
  Subject: Syria Trip in the San Francisco Chronicle
  hay: //tinvurl.com/ 2afxnif
  Bay Area execs seek to open doors with Syria
  Andrew S. Ross
  Sunday, June 20, 2010
  Call it a dual purpose mission, with pretty high stakes.
  Bay Area executives fromCisco Systems Inc.,Symantec Corp. andVeriSign Inc. returned Friday
  from a trip to Syria, where they were tasked by the Obama administration with helping open business
  and diplomatic doors to a member of what used to be called the "axis of evil."
  Were the doors flung open to a country with whom U.S. businesses are still mostly forbidden to trade?
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769938 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769938 Date: 08/31/2015
  Not exactly, given that Internet freedom, transparency, the elimination of corruption and a general
  opening up, Syrian leaders were told, are among the sine qua non for getting them what they say they
  want - U.S. businesses and investment there.
  "Candid" was a word used by one delegation member to describe the four days of talks last week in
  Damascus and Aleppo, a commercial center and Syria's largest city. "They provided a lot of clarity for
  both sides. On our side, how receptive the Syrians are to U.S. companies doing business there, and for
  the Syrians, what they need to do to get things going," said the delegation member, who agreed to
  speak only on background.
  The delegation, which also included senior executives fromMicrosoft Corp. andDell Inc., was led
  byAlec Ross, Secretary of StateHillary Rodham Clinton's senior adviser for innovation,
  andJared Cohen, a member of Clinton's policy planning staff.
  There were sit-downs with Syrian PresidentBashar Assadand other government ministers and
  meetings with business leaders, including those in the country's nascent high-tech sector, along with
  students, academics and leaders of civic and social organizations.
  Laying down the conditions:Unlike most U.S. companies, Cisco, Symantec and the other high-
  tech firms on the trip are allowed to do business in Syria under a waiver granted, under certain
  conditions, to U.S. information technology companies.
  According to Syria's state news agency, Sana, "the American executives discussed setting up
  authorized centers for (their) companies in Syria."
  But in meeting after meeting, according to the delegate, the executives said there were too many
  barriers to entry, including Internet access, which Clinton has said is a key plank of U.S. foreign
  policy.
  "They can't do business in a place that is not open," was the message, according to the delegate.
  (While Syria remains a member in good standing of the axis of authoritarians, some of the same
  concerns could be raised about countries these companies do conduct business with - like, dare we
  say, China).
  The Syrian government said it was considering a law that would require that the blocking of Web sites
  - a common, often arbitrary and unpredictable happening there - be at least subject to judicial review.
  "Now, we have to wait and see what the government does," the delegate said.
  In an earlier statement about the trip, Symantec said it was also designed to help the Obama
  administration's "effort to continue strengthening diplomatic relations throughout the Middle East."
  That also remains to be seen.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769938 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769938 Date: 08/31/2015
  It's not the first time the administration, responding to come-hither hints from Damascus, has, like
  Charlie Brown, teed up the football, only to have it snatched away, Lucy-style, as Syria got cold and
  persisted in allying itself with U.S. archenemy Iran.
  Obama, announcing the renewal of sanctions on Syria last month, cited the country's "continuing
  support for terrorist organizations and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and missile programs,
  (which) continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy
  and economy of the United States."
  Opportunities in the sand:Meanwhile,Robert Ludden, chief operating officer of San
  Francisco'sKMD Architects, is back in the Middle East seeking more business, particularly in
  Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia.
  Recently Ludden nailed down the firm's first prime contract there, as designer of the $15 million
  Imperial College of London diabetes center in Abu Dhabi, a showpiece facility for a disease that is
  surprisingly prevalent in the region.
  He sees the Middle East as a growing market for architects and designers, as a number of countries
  there, especially the desert kingdoms, are seeking to develop sustainable communities.
  "Saudi Arabia is the next big one," Ludden says.
  Going global:TheBay Area Councilofficially opened its first "overseas global office" on Friday, in
  Shanghai.
  The office, located in Shanghai's Knowledge and Innovation Community, is meant to serve as a
  gateway service for Bay Area companies looking to set up in China, as well as "guiding Chinese
  companies and investment to the Bay Area."
  Next up for a global office, the council says: India.
  Blogging at sfgate.com/columns/bottomline.Facebook page at sfg.ly/doACKM.Tweeting
  @andrewsross. E-mailbottomline@sfchronicle.com.
  http://sfgate.com/cdi-bin/article.coi?f=/c/a/2010/06/20/BUOViEOPLD.DTL
  This article appeared on pageD - lof the SanFranciscoChronicle
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769938 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769939
MetadataSubject: FROM AMORY LOVINS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769939/C05769939.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: please share also with Secretary Clinton -- thanks!
ExtractedFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:05 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769939
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Am passing on as requested. I will also follow up with Maura O'Neill — I have followed this up before at Amory's request.
  AM

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769939 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 5:05 PM
  To:
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Subject From Amory Lovins
  Am passing on as requested. I will also follow up with Maura O'Neill — I have followed this up before at Amory's request.
  AM
  From: Amory B. Lovins [mailto
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 12:54 PM
  To: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
  Cc: McAuliffe, Marisa S; Rasmussen Eric
  Subject: please share also with Secretary Clinton -- thanks!
  Dear Hillary and Anne-Marie,
  For several months I've been advising on a project to take the rainforest restoration work of Dr. Willie Smits, an
  Indonesian agroforester, to scale on Borneo. That Smits Model effort now has an economically sustainable
  design with multiple benefits for the local forest population, the nation of Indonesia, and the planet. The
  business plan has been developed by an experienced and highly reputable investment group that serves in an
  Advisory role to the Prince of Wales's Trust, and the business plan has already engaged the interest of the P8, a
  group of the eight largest global pension funds.
  The core goals of the Arenga Reforestation Project include greenhouse gas reduction, habitat restoration,
  rainforest remediation, deforestation protection, biofuel production that is non-food and carbon-positive, and
  poverty alleviation for some of the most vulnerable populations on the planet. The Internal Rate of Return, on a
  fairly mature business model and seven years of module testing, calculates to about 34% -- a decent investment
  return for almost any industry.
  You can watch Willie Smits describe the possibilities at TED (to a standing ovation) here:
  http://www.ted.comitalks/willie smits_restores_a_rainforest.html
  The State Department has been on the periphery of the concept development through Moira O'Neill, a Haas
  Professor of Business on loan to USAlD from Cal. She has kept the conversation going with the White House,
  USAID, and State, but is extremely busy with a range of other obligations and may not have the cycles to
  follow this to a conclusion.
  In my view this effort, the Arenga Reforestation Project, is the leading contender for an economically
  sustainable tropical reforestation program, and has an unprecedented climate mitigation potential (Indonesia is
  the world's #4 greenhouse-gas emitter, due largely to the burning and composting of the southern Kalimantan
  peat swamps and to rapid destruction of rainforest, both of which the Smits Model can reverse). In Aug 08 I
  spent 11 days visiting key sites of this project in Borneo, largely with Dr. Smits, whom I've known for about 20
  years. In my opinion, and that of many others, this is the world's most sophisticated and powerful model for
  integrated ecological and economic restoration, with exciting prospects for much of the tropics. I can also vouch
  for the quality and integrity of the key people involved.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769939 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769939 Date: 08/31/2015
  To make the impact even more noteworthy, the Minister of Forestry in Indonesia has now agreed to a 1:1
  acreage match between Smits Model reforestation and the protection of virgin rainforest in perpetuity as
  national park. For every 30,000 hectares of Smits Model reforestation, the Ministry will designate 30,000
  hectares (about 116 square miles) of virgin rainforest a National Park, and they have agreed to external
  monitoring by international NGOs for compliance. Since this Smits Model can scale to a million hectares, or ten
  million, with continually increasing economic, social, and environmental benefits, the two-fer impact is perhaps
  unprecedented.
  It would be worthwhile for you to have someone from your staff take a look at this. In my carefully considered
  view, the political, social, and REDD benefits could be very substantial, and the possibility of a Public-Private
  Partnership is worth consideration.
  The primary source for information on the project in the US is my friend and Senior Fellow at WI, the
  remarkable Eric Rasmussen, MD, MDM, FACP CEO of the Google-founded humanitarian NGO called
  InSTEDD. He's leading, pro bono, the team developing the business plan, and can be reached at
  or on cell at Pacific Time Zone.
  With warmest regards -- ABL
  Amory B. Lovins
  Chairman and Chief Scientist
  Rocky Mountain Institute
  1739 Snowmass Creek Road
  Snowmass CO 81654, USA
  +1 970 927 3129, fax 4178, desk (on vacation through 15 Jul), cell
  Executive Assistant (Megan Shean) +1 970 927 7202,
  Chief of Staff (Lionel Bony) +1 970 927 7307,
  Special Aide (Bennett Cohen), +1 970 927 7312,
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769939 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769941
MetadataSubject: NY MEETING
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-05T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769941/C05769941.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769941
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Wednesday, May 5, 2010 10:54 PM
  Mills, Cheryl D
  NY meeting
  Erica flagged for me, and Bill Burns just called to confirm, that Mottaki has asked the perm reps of the Security Council
  to have dinner tomorrow night.
  Susan can't attend because she's here in DC but ro oses Alex Wolff attend in her lace.
  You can discuss with Bill and Jim in the am, but wanted to flag.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769941 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Cc:
  Subject:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Wednesday, May 5, 2010 10:54 PM
  Mills, Cheryl D
  NY meeting
  Erica flagged for me, and Bill Burns just called to confirm, that Mottaki has asked the perm reps of the Security Council
  to have dinner tomorrow night.
  Susan can't attend because she's here in DC but ro oses Alex Wolff attend in her lace.
  You can discuss with Bill and Jim in the am, but wanted to flag.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769941 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769942
MetadataSubject: NY MEETING
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Sullivan, Jacob J
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-05T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769942/C05769942.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Re: NY meeting
ExtractedCc: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769942
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Wednesday, May 5, 2010 11:00 PM
  Re: NY meeting

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769942 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B5
  From:
  Sent:
  To:
  Subject
  Sullivan, Jacob J <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Wednesday, May 5, 2010 11:00 PM
  Re: NY meeting
  Original Message ---
  From: H <HDR22@clintonemail.com>
  To: Sullivan, Jacob
  Sent: Wed May 05 22:57:33 2010
  Subject: Re: NY meeting
  B5
  Original Message ---
  From: Sullivan, Jacobi <Sullivanii@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Wed May 05 22:53:34 2010
  Subject: NY meeting
  Erica flagged for me, and Bill Burns just called to confirm, that Mottaki has asked the perm reps of the Security Council
  to have dinner tomorrow night.
  Susan can't attend because she's here in DC, but proposes Alex Wolff attend in her place.
  You can discuss with Bill and Jim in the am, but wanted to flag.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769942 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769944
MetadataSubject: HAITI PREZ TO EXTEND TERM IF ELECTION NOT HELD
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-05-06T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0077/DOC_0C05769944/C05769944.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: Fw: Haiti prez to extend term if election not held
ExtractedTo: H
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedDateSent: Thursday, May 6, 2010 4:35 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769944
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: Fyi
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769944 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Thursday, May 6, 2010 4:35 AM
  To: H
  Subject: Fw: Haiti prez to extend term if election not held
  Fyi
  Original Message
  From: Reynoso, Julissa
  To: Mcdonald, Kara C; Merten, Kenneth H; Lindwall, David E; Mills, Cheryl D; Curtis, Meghann A; Warnholz, Jean-Louis
  Sent: Thu May 06 00:42:42 2010
  Subject: Fw: Haiti prez to extend term if election not held
  Original Message ---
  From: membership_services@fma.sosiltd.com <membership_services@fma.sosiltd.com>
  To: southcom_news_alerts_members_list@lists.fma.sosiltd.com
  <southcom_news_alerts_members_list@lists.fma.sosiltd.com>
  Sent: Thu May 06 00:37:39 2010
  Subject: Haiti prez to extend term if election not held
  Haiti prez to extend term if election not held JONATHAN M. KATZ,Associated Press Writer
  PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti (AP) El Haitian President Rene Preval said Wednesday he will stay in office up to three months
  past the end of his term if his earthquake-ravaged nation does not hold a presidential election as scheduled.
  His aide said the extension is needed to avoid chaos in case a ballot cannot be held to choose Preval's successor. The
  announcement set off an outcry from opposition lawmakers, who called the move unconstitutional and compared
  Preval to brutal dictators of the past.
  Preval's five-year term is scheduled to end Feb. 7. But electoral officials are struggling to hold the election as scheduled
  this fall as it copes with the loss of its headquarters and records, destroyed polling places and some 1.6 million displaced
  or deceased voters.
  The electoral council, now operating out of a gym seized in a drug raid, is also embroiled in controversy. Opposition
  candidates barred from February legislative elections that were canceled after the quake have accused council members
  of favoring Preval's newly formed Unity party. One council member also faces dismissal on charges of embezzlement.
  In a decree dated Tuesday, the 67-year-old Preval said that if an election is not held before Nov. 28 he can remain in
  office for an extra three months 13 until May 14, 2011. That date falls five years after Preval's delayed 2006 inauguration,
  which was pushed back by wrangling over the vote count.
  "If President Preval were to leave on Feb. 7, while the new president is not elected, we would find ourselves in an
  impossible situation," his chief of staff, Fritz Longchamp, said.
  He said Prime Minister Jean-Max Bellerive and Cabinet members who signed the decree "want to make sure that the
  country is not going to slip into chaos."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769944 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769944 Date: 08/31/2015
  Opposition lawmakers slammed the decision. Senator Youri Latortue said the move violated the constitution and
  pledged to challenge it before Haiti's supreme court.
  Acluche Louis-Jeune, a deputy with the Struggling People's Organization party, told Haiti's Channel 11 that Preval is
  trying to stay in office to profit from the $12.7 billion-and-counting pledged in reconstruction aid.
  "He's trying to make himself president for life like (ex-dictators Francois and Jean-Claude) Duvalier," he said.
  Longchamp said Parliament's approval is needed for the extension, but lawmakers will have to act fast: On Monday all
  seats in the lower chamber and a third of the seats in the Senate expire. The Feb. 28 election to replace them could not
  be held because of the chaos following the Jan. 12 earthquake.
  Preval also served as president from 1995 to 2000. He stepped down as scheduled when his term ended and handed
  power back to the man who preceded him, the re-elected Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
  Media Analysis and Watch Center
  USSTRATCOM Foreign Media Analysis Program SOS International Ltd.
  For additional information, please visit the SOSi USSTRATCOM FMA portal at
  Once registered, you may access FMA products and manage your
  for assistance.
  To unsubscribe from this list, please use the following link:
  subscriptions. Write to
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769944 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769947
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Verma, Richard R
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769947/C05769947.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedTo: H; Mills, Cheryl D
ExtractedFrom: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Rodriguez, Miguel E
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:39 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769947
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  Cc: Rodriguez, Miguel E
  Ann Stock was just confirmed by the Senate.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769947 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Verma, Richard R <VermaRR@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:39 AM
  To: H; Mills, Cheryl D
  Cc: Rodriguez, Miguel E
  Ann Stock was just confirmed by the Senate.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769947 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769949
MetadataSubject: FROM AMORY LOVINS
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769949/C05769949.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: From Amory Lovins
ExtractedFrom: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:25 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769949
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText: I'm on it and will report tomorrow. AM
RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769949 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:25 PM
  To:
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob J
  Subject: RE: From Amory Lovins
  I'm on it and will report tomorrow. AM
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:24 PM
  To: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D; Sullivan, Jacob
  Subject: Re: From Amory Lovins
  I don't recall hearing about this particular project before. Can you do a quick analysis before I follow up?
  Original Message ---
  From: Slaughter, Anne-Marie <SlaughterA@state.gov>
  To: H
  Cc: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>; Sullivan, Jacob J <Sullivann@state.gov>
  Sent: Mon Jun 14 17:04:52 2010
  Subject: From Amory Lovins
  Am passing on as requested. I will also follow up with Maura O'Neill — I have followed this up before at Amory's request.
  AM
  From: Amory B. Lovins [mailto:
  Sent: Saturday, June 12, 2010 12:54 PM
  To: Slaughter, Anne-Marie
  Cc: McAuliffe, Marisa 5; Rasmussen Eric
  Subject: please share also with Secretary Clinton -- thanks!
  Dear Hillary and Anne-Marie,
  For several months I've been advising on a project to take the rainforest restoration work of Dr. Willie Smits, an
  Indonesian agrofore•ster, to scale on Borneo. That Smits Model effort now has an economically sustainable design with
  multiple benefits for the local forest population, the nation of Indonesia, and the planet. The business plan has been
  developed by an experienced and highly reputable investment group that serves in an Advisory role to the Prince of
  Wales's Trust, and the business plan has already engaged the interest of the P8, a group of the eight largest global
  pension funds.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769949 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769949 Date: 08/31/2015
  The core goals of the Arenga Reforestation Project include greenhouse gas reduction, habitat restoration, rainforest
  remediation, deforestation protection, biofuel production that is non-food and carbon-positive, and poverty alleviation
  for some of the most vulnerable populations on the planet. The Internal Rate of Return, on a fairly mature business
  model and seven years of module testing, calculates to about 34% -- a decent investment return for almost any industry.
  You can watch Willie Smits describe the possibilities at TED (to a standing ovation) here:
  http://www.ted.com/talks/willie_smits_restores_a_rainforest.html
  The State Department has been on the periphery of the concept development through Moira O'Neill, a Haas Professor
  of Business on loan to USAID from Cal. She has kept the conversation going with the White House, USAID, and State, but
  is extremely busy with a range of other obligations and may not have the cycles to follow this to a conclusion.
  In my view this effort, the Arenga Reforestation Project, is the leading contender for an economically sustainable
  tropical reforestation program, and has an unprecedented climate mitigation potential (Indonesia is the world's #4
  greenhouse-gas emitter, due largely to the burning and composting of the southern Kalimantan peat swamps and to
  rapid destruction of rainforest, both of which the Smits Model can reverse). In Aug 08 I spent 11 days visiting key sites of
  this project in Borneo, largely with Dr. Smits, whom I've known for about 20 years. In my opinion, and that of many
  others, this is the world's most sophisticated and powerful model for integrated ecological and economic restoration,
  with exciting prospects for much of the tropics. I can also vouch for the quality and integrity of the key people involved.
  To make the impact even more noteworthy, the Minister of Forestry in Indonesia has now agreed to a 1:1 acreage
  match between Smits Model reforestation and the protection of virgin rainforest in perpetuity as national park. For
  every 30,000 hectares of Smits Model reforestation, the Ministry will designate 30,000 hectares (about 116 square
  miles) of virgin rainforest a National Park, and they have agreed to external monitoring by international NGOs for
  compliance. Since this Smits Model can scale to a million hectares, or ten million, with continually increasing economic,
  social, and environmental benefits, the two-fer impact is perhaps unprecedented.
  It would be worthwhile for you to have someone from your staff take a look at this. In my carefully considered view, the
  political, social, and REDD benefits could be very substantial, and the possibility of a Public-Private Partnership is worth
  consideration.
  The primary source for information on the project in the US is my friend and Senior Fellow at RMI, the remarkable Eric
  Rasmussen, MD, MDM, FACP CEO of the Google-founded humanitarian NGO called InSTEDD. He's leading, pro bono,
  the team developing the business plan, and can be reached at or on cell at
  Pacific Time Zone.
  With warmest regards -- ABL
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769949 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769949 Date: 08/31/2015
  Amory B. Lovins
  Chairman and Chief Scientist
  Rocky Mountain Institute
  1739 Snowmass Creek Road
  Snowmass CO 81654, USA
  +1 970 927 3129, fax 4178, des (on vacation through 15 Jul), cell
  Executive Assistant (Megan Shean) +1 970 927 7202,
  Chief of Staff (Lionel Bony) +1 970 927 7307,
  Special Aide (Bennett Cohen), +1 970 927 7312,
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769949 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769950
MetadataSubject: RE:
MetadataTo: Verma, Richard R
MetadataFrom: Mills, Cheryl D
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769950/C05769950.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE:
ExtractedTo: Verma, Richard R; H
ExtractedFrom: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
ExtractedCc: Rodriguez, Miguel E
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:49 AM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769950
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN FULL
ExtractedBodyText:
  OMG!
  You are so fabulous!

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769950 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN FULL
  From: Mills, Cheryl D <MillsCD@state.gov>
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:49 AM
  To: Verma, Richard R; H
  Cc: Rodriguez, Miguel E
  Subject: RE:
  OMG!
  You are so fabulous!
  Original Message
  From: Verma, Richard R
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 10:39 AM
  To: 'HDR22@clintonemail.comi; Mills, Cheryl D
  Cc: Rodriguez, Miguel E
  Subject:
  Ann Stock was just confirmed by the Senate.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769950 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769953
MetadataSubject: FOLLOW UP ON AFGHAN MATTER
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: Talbott, Strobe
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-14T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0083/DOC_0C05769953/C05769953.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-020439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: RE: follow up on Afghan matter
ExtractedFrom: Strobe Talbott < >
ExtractedCc: 'Cheryl Mills' <
ExtractedDateSent: Monday, June 14, 2010 10:06 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769953
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  June 26. In London, onwarding to Moscow.... Thought FT interview turned out well even if exposed Dan's ignorance
  about airplanes (he doesn't know the difference between a 727 and a 777!).

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769953 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART B6
  From: Strobe Talbott < >
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 10:06 PM
  To:
  Subject: RE: follow up on Afghan matter
  June 26. In London, onwarding to Moscow.... Thought FT interview turned out well even if exposed Dan's ignorance
  about airplanes (he doesn't know the difference between a 727 and a 777!).
  Original Message
  From: H [mailto:HDR22@clintonemail.com]
  Sent: Monday, June 14, 2010 9:36 PM
  To: Strobe Talbott
  Subject: Re: follow up on Afghan matter
  Thx so much for your quick and thorough followup. I'm not surprised that he believes he has to wait awhile. Let's aim for
  a time to catch up. When will you be back in DC?
  Original Message
  From: Strobe Talbott <
  To: H
  Cc: 'Cheryl Mills' <
  Sent: Wed Jun 02 18:20:34 2010
  Subject: follow up on Afghan matter
  Jake Sullivan (DOS) <SullivanJJ@state.gov>
  Hillary, as promised, I connected with Bruce Jones at NYU about Spanta. Bruce got in touch offered to help Spanta put
  together an arrangement at NYU that might have a Brookings offshoot. Spanta said he needed to decide with Karzai
  whether in fact the timing was right for him to leave. He just got back in touch with Bruce saying he's decided to stay on
  a bit longer. That said, he's agreed to participate in some Track II regional work that Bruce has underway. All in all, it
  sounds as though this has ended up in the right place for now. Bruce, Martin and I will be open to other NY/DC
  possibilities down the road when Spanta's situation changes. Thanks again for the truly terrific event at Brookings.
  Regards, Strobe
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769953 Date: 08/31/2015



DocNumber: C05769954
MetadataSubject: THE BIGGER STORY HERE IS THE INTERNAL REVOLT AGAINST MCCHRYSTAL. SID
MetadataTo: H
MetadataFrom: sbwhoeop
MetadataDateSent: 2010-06-22T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataDateReleased: 2015-08-31T04:00:00+00:00
MetadataPdfLink: DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0084/DOC_0C05769954/C05769954.pdf
MetadataCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
MetadataDocumentClass: Clinton_Email_August_Release
ExtractedSubject: H: The bigger story here is the internal revolt against McChrystal. Sid
ExtractedFrom: sbwhoeop
ExtractedDateSent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 12:07 PM
ExtractedCaseNumber: F-2014-20439
ExtractedDocNumber: C05769954
ExtractedDateReleased: 08/31/2015
ExtractedReleaseInPartOrFull: RELEASE IN PART
ExtractedBodyText:
  The Runaway General
  Stanley McChrystal, Obama's top commander in Afghanistan,
  has seized control of the war by never taking his eye off the
  real enemy: The wimps in the White House
  By Michael Hastings
  Jun 22, 2010 10:00 AM EDT
  This article originally appeared in RS 1108/1109 from July 8-22, 2010.
  'Howed I get screwed into going to this dinner?" demands Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It's a Thursday night in mid-April,
  and the commander of all U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan is sitting in a four-star suite at the HOtel Westminster in
  Paris. He's in France to sell his new war strategy to our NATO allies — to keep up the fiction, in essence, that we actually
  have allies. Since McChrystal took over a year ago, the Afghan war has become the exclusive property of the United
  States. Opposition to the war has already toppled the Dutch government, forced the resignation of Germany's president
  and sparked both Canada and the Netherlands to announce the withdrawal of their 4,500 troops. McChrystal is in Paris to
  keep the French, who have lost more than 40 soldiers in Afghanistan, from going all wobbly on him.
  "The dinner comes with the position, sir," says his chief of staff, Col. Charlie Flynn.
  McChrystal turns sharply in his chair.
  "Hey, Charlie," he asks, "does this come with the position?"
  McChrystal gives him the middle finger.
  The general stands and looks around the suite that his traveling staff of 10 has converted into a full-scale operations
  center. The tables are crowded with silver Panasonic Toughbooks, and blue cables crisscross the hotel's thick carpet,
  hooked up to satellite dishes to provide encrypted phone and e-mail communications. Dressed in off-the-rack civilian
  casual — blue tie, button-down shirt, dress slacks — McChrystal is way out of his comfort zone. Paris, as one of his
  advisers says, is the "most anti-McChrystal city you can imagine." The general hates fancy restaurants, rejecting any
  place with candles on the tables as too "Gucci." He prefers Bud Light Lime (his favorite beer) to Bordeaux, Talladega
  Nights (his favorite movie) to Jean-Luc Godard. Besides, the public eye has never been a place where McChrystal felt
  comfortable: Before President Obama put him in charge of the war in Afghanistan, he spent five years running the
  Pentagon's most secretive black ops.
  "What's the update on the Kandahar bombing?" McChrystal asks Flynn. The city has been rocked by two massive car
  bombs in the past day alone, calling into question the general's assurances that he can wrest it from the Taliban.
  "We have two KIAs, but that hasn't been confirmed," Flynn says.
  McChrystal takes a final look around the suite. At 55, he is gaunt and lean, not unlike an older version of Christian Bale in
  Rescue Dawn. His slate-blue eyes have the unsettling ability to drill down when they lock on you. If you've fucked up or
  disappointed him, they can destroy your soul without the need for him to raise his voice.
  "I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says.
  He pauses a beat.
  "Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it."
  With that, he's out the door.
  "Who's he going to dinner with?" I ask one of his aides.
  "Some French minister," the aide tells me. "It's fucking gay."
  The next morning, McChrystal and his team gather to prepare for a speech he is giving at the Ecole Militaire, a French
  military academy. The general prides himself on being sharper and ballsier than anyone else, but his brashness comes
  with a price: Although McChrystal has been in charge of the war for only a year, in that short time he has managed to piss
  off almost everyone with a stake in the conflict. Last fall, during the question-and-answer session following a speech he
  gave in London, McChrystal dismissed the counterterrorism strategy being advocated by Vice President Joe Biden as
  "shortsighted," saying it would lead to a state of "Chaos-istan." The remarks earned him a smackdown from the president
  himself, who summoned the general to a terse private meeting aboard Air Force One. The message to McChrystal
  seemed clear: Shut the fuck up, and keep a lower profile
  Now, flipping through printout cards of his speech in Paris, McChrystal wonders aloud what Biden question he might get
  today, and how he should respond. "I never know what's going to pop out until I'm up there, that's the problem," he says.
  Then, unable to help themselves, he and his staff imagine the general dismissing the vice president with a good one-
  liner.
  "Are you asking about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal says with a laugh. "Who's that?"
  "Biden?" suggests a top adviser. "Did you say: Bite Me?"
  When Barack Obama entered the Oval Office, he immediately set out to deliver on his most important campaign
  promise on foreign policy: to refocus the war in Afghanistan on what led us to invade in the first place. "I want the
  American people to understand," he announced in March 2009. "We have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle
  and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan." He ordered another 21,000 troops to Kabul, the largest increase since
  the war began in 2001. Taking the advice of both the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he also fired Gen. David
  McKiernan — then the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan — and replaced him with a man he didn't know and had
  met only briefly: Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It was the first time a top general had been relieved from duty during wartime in
  more than 50 years, since Harry Truman fired Gen. Douglas MacArthur at the height of the Korean War.
  Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The
  general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials
  in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama
  looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the roomful of military brass. Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the
  Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn't go much better. "It was a 10-minute
  photo op," says an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy
  who's going to run his fucking war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty disappointed."
  From the start, McChrystal was determined to place his personal stamp on Afghanistan, to use it as a laboratory for a
  controversial military strategy known as counterinsurgency. COIN, as the theory is known, is the new gospel of the
  Pentagon brass, a doctrine that attempts to square the military's preference for high-tech violence with the demands of
  fighting protracted wars in failed states. COIN calls for sending huge numbers of ground troops to not only destroy the
  enemy, but to live among the civilian population and slowly rebuild, or build from scratch, another nation's government — a
  process that even its staunchest advocates admit requires years, if not decades, to achieve. The theory essentially
  rebrands the military, expanding its authority (and its funding) to encompass the diplomatic and political sides of warfare:
  Think the Green Berets as an armed Peace Corps. In 2006, after Gen. David Petraeus beta-tested the theory during his
  "surge" in Iraq, it quickly gained a hardcore following of think-tankers, journalists, military officers and civilian officials.
  Nicknamed "COINdinistas" for their cultish zeal, this influential cadre believed the doctrine would be the perfect solution
  for Afghanistan. All they needed was a general with enough charisma and political savvy to implement it.
  As McChrystal leaned on Obama to ramp up the war, he did it with the same fearlessness he used to track down terrorists
  in Iraq: Figure out how your enemy operates, be faster and more ruthless than everybody else, then take the fuckers out.
  After arriving in Afghanistan last June, the general conducted his own policy review, ordered up by Defense Secretary
  Robert Gates. The now-infamous report was leaked to the press, and its conclusion was dire: If we didn't send another
  40,000 troops — swelling the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan by nearly half — we were in danger of "mission failure."
  The White House was furious. McChrystal, they felt, was trying to bully Obama, opening him up to charges of being weak
  on national security unless he did what the general wanted. It was Obama versus the Pentagon, and the Pentagon was
  determined to kick the president's ass.
  Last fall, with his top general calling for more troops, Obama launched a three-month review to re-evaluate the strategy in
  Afghanistan. "I found that time painful," McChrystal tells me in one of several lengthy interviews. "I was selling an
  unsellable position." For the general, it was a crash course in Beltway politics — a battle that pitted him against
  experienced Washington insiders like Vice President Biden, who argued that a prolonged counterinsurgency campaign in
  Afghanistan would plunge America into a military quagmire without weakening international terrorist networks. "The entire
  COIN strategy is a fraud perpetuated on the American people," says Douglas Macgregor, a retired colonel and leading
  critic of counterinsurgency who attended West Point with McChrystal. "The idea that we are going to spend a trillion
  dollars to reshape the culture of the Islamic world is utter nonsense.
  In the end, however, McChrystal got almost exactly what he wanted. On December 1st, in a speech at West Point, the
  president laid out all the reasons why fighting the war in Afghanistan is a bad idea: It's expensive; we're in an economic
  crisis; a decade-long commitment would sap American power; Al Qaeda has shifted its base of operations to Pakistan.
  Then, without ever using the words "victory" or "win," Obama announced that he would send an additional 30,000 troops
  to Afghanistan, almost as many as McChrystal had requested. The president had thrown his weight, however hesitantly,
  behind the counterinsurgency crowd.
  Today, as McChrystal gears up for an offensive in southern Afghanistan, the prospects for any kind of success look bleak.
  In June, the death toll for U.S. troops passed 1,000, and the number of IEDs has doubled. Spending hundreds of billions
  of dollars on the fifth-poorest country on earth has failed to win over the civilian population, whose attitude toward U.S.
  troops ranges from intensely wary to openly hostile. Thetiggest military operation of the year — a ferocious offensive that
  began in February to retake the southern town of Marja — continues to drag on, prompting McChrystal himself to refer to it
  as a "bleeding ulcer." In June, Afghanistan officially outpaced Vietnam as the longest war in American history — and
  Obama has quietly begun to back away from the deadline he set for withdrawing U.S. troops in July of next year. The
  president finds himself stuck in something even more insane than a quagmire: a quagmire he knowingly walked into, even
  though it's precisely the kind of gigantic, mind-numbing, multigenerational nation-building project he explicitly said he
  didn't want.
  Even those who support McChrystal and his strategy of counterinsurgency know that whatever the general manages to
  accomplish in Afghanistan, it's going to look more like Vietnam than Desert Storm. "It's not going to look like a win, smell
  like a win or taste like a win," says Maj. Gen. Bill Mayville, who serves as chief of operations for McChrystal. "This is going
  to end in an argument."
  The night after his speech in Paris, McChrystal and his staff head to Kitty O'Shea's, an Irish pub catering to tourists,
  around the corner from the hotel. His wife, Annie, has joined him for a rare visit: Since the Iraq War began in 2003, she
  has seen her husband less than 30 days a year. Though it is his and Annie's 33rd wedding anniversary, McChrystal has
  invited his inner circle along for dinner and drinks at the "least Gucci" place his staff could find. His wife isn't surprised.
  "He once took me to a Jack in the Box when I was dressed in formalwear," she says with a laugh.
  The general's staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs.
  There's a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two
  fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as
  Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves
  on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority. After arriving in Kabul last summer, Team America set about
  changing the culture of the International Security Assistance Force, as the NATO-led mission is known. (U.S. soldiers had
  taken to deriding ISAF as short for "I Suck at Fighting" or "In Sandals and Flip-Flops.") McChrystal banned alcohol on
  base, kicked out Burger King and other symbols of American excess, expanded the morning briefing to include thousands
  of officers and refashioned the command center into a Situational Awareness Room, a free-flowing information hub
  modeled after Mayor Mike Bloomberg's offices in New York. He also set a manic pace for his staff, becoming legendary
  for sleeping four hours a night, running seven miles each morning, and eating one meal a day. (In the month I spend
  around the general, I witness him eating only once.) It's a kind of superhuman narrative that has built up around him, a
  staple in almost every media profile, as if the ability to go without sleep and food translates into the possibility of a man
  single-handedly winning the war.
  By midnight at Kitty O'Shea's, much of Team America is completely shitfaced. Two officers do an Irish jig mixed with steps
  from a traditional Afghan wedding dance, while McChrystal's top advisers lock arms and sing a slurred song of their own
  invention."Afghanistan!" they bellow."Afghanistan!" They call it their Afghanistan song.
  McChrystal steps away from the circle, observing his team. "All these men," he tells me. "I'd die for them. And they'd die
  for me."
  The assembled men may look and sound like a bunch of combat veterans letting off steam, but in fact this tight-knit group
  represents the most powerful force shaping U.S. policy in Afghanistan. While McChrystal and his men are in indisputable
  command of all military aspects of the war, there is no equivalent position on the diplomatic or political side. Instead, an
  assortment of administration players compete over the Afghan portfolio: U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, Special
  Representative to Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke, National Security Advisor Jim Jones and Secretary of State Hillary
  Clinton, not to mention 40 or so other coalition ambassadors and a host of talking heads who try to insert themselves into
  the mess, from John Kerry to John McCain. This diplomatic incoherence has effectively allowed McChrystal's team to call
  the shots and hampered efforts to build a stable and credible government in Afghanistan. "It jeopardizes the mission,"
  says Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who supports McChrystal. "The military cannot
  by itself create governance reform."
  Part of the problem is structural: The Defense Department budget exceeds $600 billion a year, while the State
  Department receives only $50 billion. But part of the problem is personal: In private, Team McChrystal likes to talk shit
  about many of Obama's top people on the diplomatic side. One aide calls Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and
  veteran of the Cold War, a "clown" who remains "stuck in 1985." Politicians like McCain and Kerry, says another aide,
  "turn up, have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him at the airport press conference, then get back for the Sunday talk
  shows. Frankly, it's not very helpful." Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal's inner circle. "Hillary
  had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said, 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.'"
  McChrystal reserves special skepticism for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating the Taliban. "The Boss says
  he's like a wounded animal," says a member of the general's team. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to
  get fired, so that makes him dangerous. He's a brilliant guy, but he just comes in, pulls on a lever, whatever he can grasp
  onto. But this is COIN, and you can't just have someone yanking on shit."
  At one point on his trip to Paris, McChrystal checks his BlackBerry. "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke," he groans. "I
  don't even want to open it." He clicks on the message and reads the salutation out loud, then stuffs the BladkBerry back in
  his pocket, not bothering to conceal his annoyance.
  "Make sure you don't get any of that on your leg," an aide jokes, referring to the e-mail.
  By far the most crucial — and strained — relationship is between McChrystal and Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador.
  According to those close to the two men, Eikenberry — a retired three-star general who served in Afghanistan in 2002 and
  2005 — can't stand that his former subordinate is now calling the shots. He's also furious that McChrystal, backed by
  NATO's allies, refused to put Eikenberry in the pivotal role of viceroy in Afghanistan, which would have made him the
  diplomatic equivalent of the general. The job instead went to British Ambassador Mark Sedwill — a move that effectively
  increased McChrystal's influence over diplomacy by shutting out a powerful rival. "In reality, that position needs to be filled
  by an American for it to have weight," says a U.S. official familiar with the negotiations.
  The relationship was further strained in January, when a classified cable that Eikenberry wrote was leaked to The New
  York Times. The cable was as scathing as it was prescient. The ambassador offered a brutal critique of McChrystal's
  strategy, dismissed President Hamid Karzai as "not an adequate strategic partner," and cast doubt on whether the
  counterinsurgency plan would be "sufficient" to deal with Al Qaeda. "We will become more deeply engaged here with no
  way to extricate ourselves," Eikenberry warned, "short of allowing the country to descend again into lawlessness and
  chaos."
  McChrystal and his team were blindsided by the cable. "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said
  anything like that to us before," says McChrystal, who adds that he felt "betrayed" by the leak. "Here's one that covers his
  flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.'"
  The most striking example of McChrystal's usurpation of diplomatic policy is his handling of Karzai. It is McChrystal, not
  diplomats like Eikenberry or Holbrooke, who enjoys the best relationship with the man America is relying on to lead
  Afghanistan. The doctrine of counterinsurgency requires a credible government, and since Karzai is not considered
  credible by his own people, McChrystal has worked hard to make him so. Over the past few months, he has accompanied
  the president on more than 10 trips around the country, standing beside him at political meetings, or shuras, in Kandahar.
  In February, the day before the doomed offensive in Marja, McChrystal even drove over to the president's palace to get
  him to sign off on what would be the largest military operation of the year. Karzai's staff, however, insisted that the
  president was sleeping off a cold and could not be disturbed. After several hours of haggling, McChrystal finally enlisted
  the aid of Afghanistan's defense minister, who persuaded Karzai's people to wake the president from his nap.
  This is one of the central flaws with McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy: The need to build a credible government
  puts us at the mercy of whatever tin-pot leader we've backed — a danger that Eikenberry explicitly warned about in his
  cable. Even Team McChrystal privately acknowledges that Karzai is a less-than-ideal partner. "He's been locked up in his
  palace the past year," laments one of the general's top advisers. At times, Karzai himself has actively undermined
  McChrystal's desire to put him in charge. During a recent visit to Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Karzai met three U.S.
  soldiers who had been wounded in Uruzgan province. "General," he called out to McChrystal, "I didn't even know we were
  fighting in Uruzgan!"
  Growing up as a military brat, McChrystal exhibited the mixture of brilliance and cockiness that would follow him
  throughout his career. His father fought in Korea and Vietnam, retiring as a two-star general, and his four brothers all
  joined the armed services. Moving around to different bases, McChrystal took solace in baseball, a sport in which he
  made no pretense of hiding his superiority: In Little League, he would call out strikes to the crowd before whipping a
  fastball down the middle.
  McChrystal entered West Point in 1972, when the U.S. military was close to its all-time low in popularity. His class was the
  last to graduate before the academy started to admit women. The "Prison on the Hudson," as it was known then, was a
  potent mix of testosterone, hooliganism and reactionary patriotism. Cadets repeatedly trashed the mess hall in food fights,
  and birthdays were celebrated with a tradition called "rat fucking," which often left the birthday boy outside in the snow or
  mud, covered in shaving cream. "It was pretty out of control," says Lt. Gen. David Barno, a classmate who went on to
  serve as the top commander in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005. The class, filled with what Barno calls "huge talent" and
  "wild-eyed teenagers with a strong sense of idealism," also produced Gen. Ray Odierno, the current commander of U.S.
  forces in Iraq.
  The son of a general, McChrystal was also a ringleader of the campus dissidents — a dual role that taught him how to
  thrive in a rigid, top-down environment while thumbing his nose at authority every chance he got. He accumulated more
  than 100 hours of demerits for drinking, partying and insubordination — a record that his classmates boasted made him a
  "century man." One classmate, who asked not to be named, recalls finding McChrystal passed out in the shower after
  downing a case of beer he had hidden under the sink. The troublemaking almost got him kicked out, and he spent hours
  subjected to forced marches in the Area, a paved courtyard where unruly cadets were disciplined. "I'd come visit, and I'd
  end up spending most of my time in the library, while Stan was in the Area," recalls Annie, who began dating McChrystal
  in 1973.
  McChrystal wound up ranking 298 out of a class of 855, a serious underachievement for a man widely regarded as
  brilliant. His most compelling work was extracurricular: As managing editor of The Pointer, the West Point literary
  magazine, McChrystal wrote seven short stories that eerily foreshadow many of the issues he would confront in his
  career. In one tale, a fictional officer complains about the difficulty of training foreign troops to fight; in another, a 19-year-
  old soldier kills a boy he mistakes for a terrorist. In "Brinkman's Note," a piece of suspense fiction, the unnamed narrator
  appears to be trying to stop a plot to assassinate the president. It turns out, however, that the narrator himself is the
  assassin, and he's able to infiltrate the White House: "The President strode in smiling. From the right coat pocket of the
  raincoat I carried, I slowly drew forth my 32-caliber pistol. In Brinkman's failure, I had succeeded."
  After graduation, 2nd Lt. Stanley McChrystal entered an Army that was all but broken in the wake of Vietnam. "We really
  felt we were a peacetime generation," he recalls. "There was the Gulf War, but even that didn't feel like that big of a deal."
  So McChrystal spent his career where the action was: He enrolled in Special Forces school and became a regimental
  commander of the 3rd Ranger Battalion in 1986. It was a dangerous position, even in peacetime — nearly two dozen
  Rangers were killed in training accidents during the Eighties. It was also an unorthodox career path: Most soldiers who
  want to climb the ranks to general don't go into the Rangers. Displaying a penchant for transforming systems he considers
  outdated, McChrystal set out to revolutionize the training regime for the Rangers. He introduced mixed martial arts,
  required every soldier to qualify with night-vision goggles on the rifle range and forced troops to build up their endurance
  with weekly marches involving heavy backpacks.
  In the late 1990s, McChrystal shrewdly improved his inside game, spending a year at Harvard's Kennedy School of
  Government and then at the Council on Foreign Relations, where he co-authored a treatise on the merits and drawbacks
  of humanitarian interventionism. But as he moved up through the ranks, McChrystal relied on the skills he had learned as
  a troublemaking kid at West Point: knowing precisely how far he could go in a rigid military hierarchy without getting
  tossed out. Being a highly intelligent badass, he discovered, could take you far — especially in the political chaos that
  followed September 11th. "He was very focused," says Annie. "Even as a young officer he seemed to know what he
  wanted to do. I don't think his personality has changed in all these years."
  By some accounts, McChrystal's career should have been over at least two times by now. As Pentagon spokesman
  during the invasion of Iraq, the general seemed more like a White House mouthpiece than an up-and-coming commander
  with a reputation for speaking his mind. When Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld made his infamous "stuff happens"
  remark during the looting of Baghdad, McChrystal backed him up. A few days later, he echoed the president's Mission
  Accomplished gaffe by insisting that major combat operations in Iraq were over. But it was during his next stint —
  overseeing the military's most elite units, including the Rangers, Navy Seals and Delta Force — that McChrystal took part
  in a cover-up that would have destroyed the career of a lesser man.
  After Cpl. Pat Tillman, the former-NFL-star-turned-Ranger, was accidentally killed by his own troops in Afghanistan in April
  2004, McChrystal took an active role in creating the impression that Tillman had died at the hands of Taliban fighters. He
  signed off on a falsified recommendation for a Silver Star that suggested Tillman had been killed by enemy fire.
  (McChrystal would later claim he didn't read the recommendation closely enough — a strange excuse for a commander
  known for his laserlike attention to minute details.) A week later, McChrystal sent a memo up the chain of command,
  specifically warning that President Bush should avoid mentioning the cause of Tillman's death. "If the circumstances of
  Corporal Tillman's death become public," he wrote, it could cause "public embarrassment" for the president.
  "The false narrative, which McChrystal clearly helped construct, diminished Pat's true actions," wrote Tillman's mother,
  Mary, in her book Boots on the Ground by Dusk. McChrystal got away with it, she added, because he was the "golden
  boy" of Rumsfeld and Bush, who loved his willingness to get things done, even if it included bending the rules or skipping
  the chain of command. Nine days after Tillman's death, McChrystal was promoted to major general.
  Two years later, in 2006, McChrystal was tainted by a scandal involving detainee abuse and torture at Camp Nama in
  Iraq. According to a report by Human Rights Watch, prisoners at the camp were subjected to a now-familiar litany of
  abuse: stress positions, being dragged naked through the mud. McChrystal was not disciplined in the scandal, even
  though an interrogator at the camp reported seeing him inspect the prison multiple times. But the experience was so
  unsettling to McChrystal that he tried to prevent detainee operations from being placed under his command in
  Afghanistan, viewing them as a "political swamp," according to a U.S. official. In May 2009, as McChrystal prepared for
  his confirmation hearings, his staff prepared him for hard questions about Camp Nama and the Tillman cover-up. But the
  scandals barely made a ripple in Congress, and McChrystal was soon on his way back to Kabul to run the war in
  Afghanistan.
  The media, to a large extent, have also given McChrystal a pass on both controversies. Where Gen. Petraeus is kind of a
  dweeb, a teacher's pet with a Ranger's tab, McChrystal is a snake-eating rebel, a "Jedi" commander, as Newsweek called
  him. He didn't care when his teenage son came home with blue hair and a mohawk. He speaks his mind with a candor
  rare for a high-ranking official. He asks for opinions, and seems genuinely interested in the response. He gets briefings on
  his iPod and listens to books on tape. He carries a custom-made set of nunchucks in his convoy engraved with his name
  and four stars, and his itinerary often bears a fresh quote from Bruce Lee. ("There are no limits. There are only plateaus,
  and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them.") He went out on dozens of nighttime raids during his time in Iraq,
  unprecedented for a top commander, and turned up on missions unannounced, with almost no entourage. "The fucking
  lads love Stan McChrystal," says a British officer who serves in Kabul. "You'd be out in Somewhere, Iraq, and someone
  would take a knee beside you, and a corporal would be like 'Who the fuck is that?' And it's fucking Stan McChrystal."
  It doesn't hurt that McChrystal was also extremely successful as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, the elite
  forces that carry out the government's darkest ops. During the Iraq surge, his team killed and captured thousands of
  insurgents, including Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. "JSOC was a killing machine," says Maj. Gen.
  Mayville, his chief of operations. McChrystal was also open to new ways of killing. He systematically mapped out terrorist
  networks, targeting specific insurgents and hunting them down — often with the help of cyberfreaks traditionally shunned
  by the military. "The Boss would find the 24-year-old kid with a nose ring, with some fucking brilliant degree from MIT,
  sitting in the corner with 16 computer monitors humming," says a Special Forces commando who worked with McChrystal
  in Iraq and now serves on his staff in Kabul. "He'd say, 'Hey — you fucking muscleheads couldn't find lunch without help.
  You got to work together with these guys.'"
  Even in his new role as America's leading evangelist for counterinsurgency, McChrystal retains the deep-seated instincts
  of a terrorist hunter. To put pressure on the Taliban, he has upped the number of Special Forces units in Afghanistan from
  four to 19. "You better be out there hitting four or five targets tonight," McChrystal will tell a Navy Seal he sees in the
  hallway at headquarters. Then he'll add, "I'm going to have to scold you in the morning for it, though." In fact, the general
  frequently finds himself apologizing for the disastrous consequences of counterinsurgency. In the first four months of this
  year, NATO forces killed some 90 civilians, up 76 percent from the same period in 2009 — a record that has created
  tremendous resentment among the very population that COIN theory is intent on winning over. In February, a Special
  Forces night raid ended in the deaths of two pregnant Afghan women and allegations of a cover-up, and in April, protests
  erupted in Kandahar after U.S. forces accidentally shot up a bus, killing five Afghans. "We've shot an amazing number of
  people," McChrystal recently conceded.
  Despite the tragedies and miscues, McChrystal has issued some of the strictest directives to avoid civilian casualties that
  the U.S. military has ever encountered in a war zone. It's "insurgent math," as he calls it — for every innocent person you
  kill, you create 10 new enemies. He has ordered convoys to curtail their reckless driving, put restrictions on the use of air
  power and severely limited night raids. He regularly apologizes to Hamid Karzai when civilians are killed, and berates
  commanders responsible for civilian deaths. "For a while," says one U.S. official, "the most dangerous place to be in
  Afghanistan was in front of McChrystal after a 'civ cas' incident." The ISAF command has even discussed ways to make
  not killing into something you can win an award for: There's talk of creating a new medal for "courageous restraint," a
  buzzword that's unlikely to gain much traction in the gung-ho culture of the U.S. military.
  But however strategic they may be, McChrystal's new marching orders have caused an intense backlash among his own
  troops. Being told to hold their fire, soldiers complain, puts them in greater danger. "Bottom line?" says a former Special
  Forces operator who has spent years in Iraq and Afghanistan. "I would love to kick McChrystal in the nuts. His rules of
  engagement put soldiers' lives in even greater danger. Every real soldier will tell you the same thing."
  In March, McChrystal traveled to Combat Outpost JFM — a small encampment on the outskirts of Kandahar — to confront
  such accusations from the troops directly. It was a typically bold move by the general. Only two days earlier, he had
  received an e-mail from Israel Arroyo, a 25-year-old staff sergeant who asked McChrystal to go on a mission with his unit.
  "I am writing because it was said you don't care about the troops and have made it harder to defend ourselves," Arroyo
  wrote.
  Within hours, McChrystal responded personally: "I'm saddened by the accusation that I don't care about soldiers, as it is
  something I suspect any soldier takes both personally and professionally — at least I do. But I know perceptions depend
  upon your perspective at the time, and I respect that every soldier's view is his own." Then he showed up at Arroyo's
  outpost and went on a foot patrol with the troops — not some bullshit photo-op stroll through a market, but a real live
  operation in a dangerous war zone.
  Six weeks later, just before McChrystal returned from Paris, the general received another e-mail from Arroyo. A 23-year-
  old corporal named Michael Ingram — one of the soldiers McChrystal had gone on patrol with — had been killed by an IED
  a day earlier. It was the third man the 25-member platoon had lost in a year, and Arroyo was writing to see if the general
  would attend Ingram's memorial service. "He started to look up to you," Arroyo wrote. McChrystal said he would try to
  make it down to pay his respects as soon as possible.
  The night before the general is scheduled to visit Sgt. Arroyo's platoon for the memorial, I arrive at Combat Outpost JFM
  to speak with the soldiers he had gone on patrol with. JFM is a small encampment, ringed by high blast walls and guard
  towers. Almost all of the soldiers here have been on repeated combat tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and have seen
  some of the worst fighting of both wars. But they are especially angered by Ingram's death. His commanders had
  repeatedly requested permission to tear down the house where Ingram was killed, noting that it was often used as a
  combat position by the Taliban. But due to McChrystal's new restrictions to avoid upsetting civilians, the request had been
  denied. "These were abandoned houses," fumes Staff Sgt. Kennith Hicks. "Nobody was coming back to live in them."
  One soldier shows me the list of new regulations the platoon was given. "Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably
  certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force," the laminated card reads. For a soldier who has
  traveled halfway around the world to fight, that's like telling a cop he should only patrol in areas where he knows he won't
  have to make arrests. "Does that make any fucking sense?" asks Pfc. Jared Pautsch. "We should just drop a fucking
  bomb on this place. You sit and ask yourself: What are we doing here?"
  The rules handed out here are not what McChrystal intended — they've been distorted as they passed through the chain of
  command — but knowing that does nothing to lessen the anger of troops on the ground. "Fuck, when I came over here and
  heard that McChrystal was in charge, I thought we would get our fucking gun on," says Hicks, who has served three tours
  of combat. "I get COIN. I get all that. McChrystal comes here, explains it, it makes sense. But then he goes away on his
  bird, and by the time his directives get passed down to us through Big Army, they're all fucked up — either because
  somebody is trying to cover their ass, or because they just don't understand it themselves. But we're fucking losing this
  thing."
  McChrystal and his team show up the next day. Underneath a tent, the general has a 45-minute discussion with some two
  dozen soldiers. The atmosphere is tense. "I ask you what's going on in your world, and I think it's important for you all to
  understand the big picture as well," McChrystal begins. "How's the company doing? You guys feeling sorry for
  yourselves? Anybody? Anybody feel like you're losing?" McChrystal says.
  "Sir, some of the guys here, sir, think we're losing, sir," says Hicks.
  McChrystal nods. "Strength is leading when you just don't want to lead," he tells the men. "You're leading by example.
  That's what we do. Particularly when it's really, really hard, and it hurts inside." Then he spends 20 minutes talking about
  counterinsurgency, diagramming his concepts and principles on a whiteboard. He makes COIN seem like common sense,
  but he's careful not to bullshit the men. "We are knee-deep in the decisive year," he tells them. The Taliban, he insists, no
  longer has the initiative — "but I don't think we do, either." It's similar to the talk he gave in Paris, but it's not winning any
  hearts and minds among the soldiers. "This is the philosophical part that works with think tanks," McChrystal tries to joke.
  "But it doesn't get the same reception from infantry companies."
  During the question-and-answer period, the frustration boils over. The soldiers complain about not being allowed to use
  lethal force, about watching insurgents they detain be freed for lack of evidence. They want to be able to fight — like they
  did in Iraq, like they had in Afghanistan before McChrystal. 'We aren't putting fear into the Taliban," one soldier says.
  "Winning hearts and minds in COIN is a coldblooded thing," McChrystal says, citing an oft-repeated maxim that you can't
  kill your way out of Afghanistan. "The Russians killed 1 million Afghans, and that didn't work."
  "I'm not saying go out and kill everybody, sir," the soldier persists. "You say we've stopped the momentum of the
  insurgency. I don't believe that's true in this area. The more we pull back, the more we restrain ourselves, the stronger it's
  getting."
  "I agree with you," McChrystal says. "In this area, we've not made progress, probably. You have to show strength here,
  you have to use fire. What I'm telling you is, fire costs you. What do you want to do? You want to wipe the population out
  here and resettle it?"
  A soldier complains that under the rules, any insurgent who doesn't have a weapon is immediately assumed to be a
  civilian. "That's the way this game is," McChrystal says. "It's complex. I can't just decide: It's shirts and skins, and we'll kill
  all the shirts."
  As the discussion ends, McChrystal seems to sense that he hasn't succeeded at easing the men's anger. He makes one
  last-ditch effort to reach them, acknowledging the death of Cpl. Ingram. "There's no way I can make that easier," he tells
  them. "No way I can pretend it won't hurt. No way I can tell you not to feel that. . . . I will tell you, you're doing a great job.
  Don't let the frustration get to you." The session ends with no clapping, and no real resolution. McChrystal may have sold
  President Obama on counterinsurgency, but many of his own men aren't buying it.
  When it comes to Afghanistan, history is not on McChrystal's side. The only foreign invader to have any success here
  was Genghis Khan — and he wasn't hampered by things like human rights, economic development and press scrutiny.
  The COIN doctrine, bizarrely, draws inspiration from some of the biggest Western military embarrassments in recent
  memory: France's nasty war in Algeria (lost in 1962) and the American misadventure in Vietnam (lost in 1975).
  McChrystal, like other advocates of COIN, readily acknowledges that counterinsurgency campaigns are inherently messy,
  expensive and easy to lose. "Even Afghans are confused by Afghanistan," he says. But even if he somehow manages to
  succeed, after years of bloody fighting with Afghan kids who pose no threat to the U.S. homeland, the war will do little to
  shut down Al Qaeda, which has shifted its operations to Pakistan. Dispatching 150,000 troops to build new schools,
  roads, mosques and water-treatment facilities around Kandahar is like trying to stop the drug war in Mexico by occupying
  Arkansas and building Baptist churches in Little Rock. "It's all very cynical, politically," says Marc Sageman, a former CIA
  case officer who has extensive experience in the region. "Afghanistan is not in our vital interest — there's nothing for us
  there."
  In mid-May, two weeks after visiting the troops in Kandahar, McChrystal travels to the White House for a high-level visit by
  Hamid Karzai. It is a triumphant moment for the general, one that demonstrates he is very much in command — both in
  Kabul and in Washington. In the East Room, which is packed with journalists and dignitaries, President Obama sings the
  praises of Karzai. The two leaders talk about how great their relationship is, about the pain they feel over civilian
  casualties. They mention the word "progress" 16 times in under an hour. But there is no mention of victory. Still, the •
  session represents the most forceful commitment that Obama has made to McChrystal's strategy in months. "There is no
  denying the progress that the Afghan people have made in recent years — in education, in health care and economic
  development," the president says. "As I saw in the lights across Kabul when I landed — lights that would not have been
  visible just a few years earlier."
  It is a disconcerting observation for Obama to make. During the worst years in Iraq, when the Bush administration had no
  real progress to point to, officials used to offer up the exact same evidence of success. "It was one of our first
  impressions," one GOP official said in 2006, after landing in Baghdad at the height of the sectarian violence. "So many
  lights shining brightly." So it is to the language of the Iraq War that the Obama administration has turned — talk of
  progress, of city lights, of metrics like health care and education. Rhetoric that just a few years ago they would have
  mocked. "They are trying to manipulate perceptions because there is no definition of victory — because victory is not even
  defined or recognizable," says Celeste Ward, a senior defense analyst at the RAND Corporation who served as a political
  adviser to U.S. commanders in Iraq in 2006. "That's the game we're in right now. What we need, for strategic purposes, is
  to create the perception that we didn't get run off. The facts on the ground are not great, and are not going to become
  great in the near future."
  But facts on the ground, as history has proven, offer little deterrent to a military determined to stay the course. Even those
  closest to McChrystal know that the rising anti-war sentiment at home doesn't begin to reflect how deeply fucked up things
  are in Afghanistan. "If Americans pulled back and started paying attention to this war, it would become even less popular,"
  a senior adviser to McChrystal says. Such realism, however, doesn't prevent advocates of counterinsurgency from
  dreaming big: Instead of beginning to withdraw troops next year, as Obama promised, the military hopes to ramp up its
  counterinsurgency campaign even further. "There's a possibility we could ask for another surge of U.S. forces next
  summer if we see success here," a senior military official in Kabul tells me.
  Back in Afghanistan, less than a month after the White House meeting with Karzai and all the talk of "progress,"
  McChrystal is hit by the biggest blow to his vision of counterinsurgency. Since last year, the Pentagon had been planning
  to launch a major military operation this summer in Kandahar, the country's second-largest city and the Taliban's original
  home base. It was supposed to be a decisive turning point in the war — the primary reason for the troop surge that
  McChrystal wrested from Obama late last year. But on June 10th, acknowledging that the military still needs to lay more
  groundwork, the general announced that he is postponing the offensive until the fall. Rather than one big battle, like
  Fallujah or Ramadi, U.S. troops will implement what McChrystal calls a "rising tide of security." The Afghan police and
  army will enter Kandahar to attempt to seize control of neighborhoods, while the U.S. pours $90 million of aid into the city
  to win over the civilian population.
  Even proponents of counterinsurgency are hard-pressed to explain the new plan. "This isn't a classic operation," says a
  U.S. military official. "It's not going to be Black Hawk Down. There aren't going to be doors kicked in." Other U.S. officials
  insist that doors are going to be kicked in, but that it's going to be a kinder, gentler offensive than the disaster in Marja.
  "The Taliban have a jackboot on the city," says a military official. "We have to remove them, but we have to do it in a way
  that doesn't alienate the population." When Vice President Biden was briefed on the new plan in the Oval Office, insiders
  say he was shocked to see how much it mirrored the more gradual plan of counterterrorism that he advocated last fall.
  "This looks like CT-plus!" he said, according to U.S. officials familiar with the meeting.
  Whatever the nature of the new plan, the delay underscores the fundamental flaws of counterinsurgency. After nine years
  of war, the Taliban simply remains too strongly entrenched for the U.S. military to openly attack. The very people that
  COIN seeks to win over — the Afghan people — do not want us there. Our supposed ally, President Karzai, used his
  influence to delay the offensive, and the massive influx of aid championed by McChrystal is likely only to make things
  worse. "Throwing money at the problem exacerbates the problem," says Andrew Wilder, an expert at Tufts University who
  has studied the effect of aid in southern Afghanistan. "A tsunami of cash fuels corruption, delegitimizes the government
  and creates an environment where we're picking winners and losers" — a process that fuels resentment and hostility
  among the civilian population. So far, counterinsurgency has succeeded only in creating a never-ending demand for the
  primary product supplied by the military: perpetual war. There is a reason that President Obama studiously avoids using
  the word "victory" when he talks about Afghanistan. Winning, it would seem, is not really possible. Not even with
  Stanley McChrystal in charge.
  This article originally appeared in RS 1108/1109 from July 8-22, 2010.

RawText:
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  RELEASE IN PART
  B6
  From: sbwhoeop
  Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 12:07 PM
  To:
  Subject: H: The bigger story here is the internal revolt against McChrystal. Sid
  The Runaway General
  Stanley McChrystal, Obama's top commander in Afghanistan,
  has seized control of the war by never taking his eye off the
  real enemy: The wimps in the White House
  By Michael Hastings
  Jun 22, 2010 10:00 AM EDT
  This article originally appeared in RS 1108/1109 from July 8-22, 2010.
  'Howed I get screwed into going to this dinner?" demands Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It's a Thursday night in mid-April,
  and the commander of all U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan is sitting in a four-star suite at the HOtel Westminster in
  Paris. He's in France to sell his new war strategy to our NATO allies — to keep up the fiction, in essence, that we actually
  have allies. Since McChrystal took over a year ago, the Afghan war has become the exclusive property of the United
  States. Opposition to the war has already toppled the Dutch government, forced the resignation of Germany's president
  and sparked both Canada and the Netherlands to announce the withdrawal of their 4,500 troops. McChrystal is in Paris to
  keep the French, who have lost more than 40 soldiers in Afghanistan, from going all wobbly on him.
  "The dinner comes with the position, sir," says his chief of staff, Col. Charlie Flynn.
  McChrystal turns sharply in his chair.
  "Hey, Charlie," he asks, "does this come with the position?"
  McChrystal gives him the middle finger.
  The general stands and looks around the suite that his traveling staff of 10 has converted into a full-scale operations
  center. The tables are crowded with silver Panasonic Toughbooks, and blue cables crisscross the hotel's thick carpet,
  hooked up to satellite dishes to provide encrypted phone and e-mail communications. Dressed in off-the-rack civilian
  casual — blue tie, button-down shirt, dress slacks — McChrystal is way out of his comfort zone. Paris, as one of his
  advisers says, is the "most anti-McChrystal city you can imagine." The general hates fancy restaurants, rejecting any
  place with candles on the tables as too "Gucci." He prefers Bud Light Lime (his favorite beer) to Bordeaux, Talladega
  Nights (his favorite movie) to Jean-Luc Godard. Besides, the public eye has never been a place where McChrystal felt
  comfortable: Before President Obama put him in charge of the war in Afghanistan, he spent five years running the
  Pentagon's most secretive black ops.
  "What's the update on the Kandahar bombing?" McChrystal asks Flynn. The city has been rocked by two massive car
  bombs in the past day alone, calling into question the general's assurances that he can wrest it from the Taliban.
  "We have two KIAs, but that hasn't been confirmed," Flynn says.
  McChrystal takes a final look around the suite. At 55, he is gaunt and lean, not unlike an older version of Christian Bale in
  Rescue Dawn. His slate-blue eyes have the unsettling ability to drill down when they lock on you. If you've fucked up or
  disappointed him, they can destroy your soul without the need for him to raise his voice.
  "I'd rather have my ass kicked by a roomful of people than go out to this dinner," McChrystal says.
  He pauses a beat.
  "Unfortunately," he adds, "no one in this room could do it."
  With that, he's out the door.
  "Who's he going to dinner with?" I ask one of his aides.
  "Some French minister," the aide tells me. "It's fucking gay."
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  The next morning, McChrystal and his team gather to prepare for a speech he is giving at the Ecole Militaire, a French
  military academy. The general prides himself on being sharper and ballsier than anyone else, but his brashness comes
  with a price: Although McChrystal has been in charge of the war for only a year, in that short time he has managed to piss
  off almost everyone with a stake in the conflict. Last fall, during the question-and-answer session following a speech he
  gave in London, McChrystal dismissed the counterterrorism strategy being advocated by Vice President Joe Biden as
  "shortsighted," saying it would lead to a state of "Chaos-istan." The remarks earned him a smackdown from the president
  himself, who summoned the general to a terse private meeting aboard Air Force One. The message to McChrystal
  seemed clear: Shut the fuck up, and keep a lower profile
  Now, flipping through printout cards of his speech in Paris, McChrystal wonders aloud what Biden question he might get
  today, and how he should respond. "I never know what's going to pop out until I'm up there, that's the problem," he says.
  Then, unable to help themselves, he and his staff imagine the general dismissing the vice president with a good one-
  liner.
  "Are you asking about Vice President Biden?" McChrystal says with a laugh. "Who's that?"
  "Biden?" suggests a top adviser. "Did you say: Bite Me?"
  When Barack Obama entered the Oval Office, he immediately set out to deliver on his most important campaign
  promise on foreign policy: to refocus the war in Afghanistan on what led us to invade in the first place. "I want the
  American people to understand," he announced in March 2009. "We have a clear and focused goal: to disrupt, dismantle
  and defeat Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Afghanistan." He ordered another 21,000 troops to Kabul, the largest increase since
  the war began in 2001. Taking the advice of both the Pentagon and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, he also fired Gen. David
  McKiernan — then the U.S. and NATO commander in Afghanistan — and replaced him with a man he didn't know and had
  met only briefly: Gen. Stanley McChrystal. It was the first time a top general had been relieved from duty during wartime in
  more than 50 years, since Harry Truman fired Gen. Douglas MacArthur at the height of the Korean War.
  Even though he had voted for Obama, McChrystal and his new commander in chief failed from the outset to connect. The
  general first encountered Obama a week after he took office, when the president met with a dozen senior military officials
  in a room at the Pentagon known as the Tank. According to sources familiar with the meeting, McChrystal thought Obama
  looked "uncomfortable and intimidated" by the roomful of military brass. Their first one-on-one meeting took place in the
  Oval Office four months later, after McChrystal got the Afghanistan job, and it didn't go much better. "It was a 10-minute
  photo op," says an adviser to McChrystal. "Obama clearly didn't know anything about him, who he was. Here's the guy
  who's going to run his fucking war, but he didn't seem very engaged. The Boss was pretty disappointed."
  From the start, McChrystal was determined to place his personal stamp on Afghanistan, to use it as a laboratory for a
  controversial military strategy known as counterinsurgency. COIN, as the theory is known, is the new gospel of the
  Pentagon brass, a doctrine that attempts to square the military's preference for high-tech violence with the demands of
  fighting protracted wars in failed states. COIN calls for sending huge numbers of ground troops to not only destroy the
  enemy, but to live among the civilian population and slowly rebuild, or build from scratch, another nation's government — a
  process that even its staunchest advocates admit requires years, if not decades, to achieve. The theory essentially
  rebrands the military, expanding its authority (and its funding) to encompass the diplomatic and political sides of warfare:
  Think the Green Berets as an armed Peace Corps. In 2006, after Gen. David Petraeus beta-tested the theory during his
  "surge" in Iraq, it quickly gained a hardcore following of think-tankers, journalists, military officers and civilian officials.
  Nicknamed "COINdinistas" for their cultish zeal, this influential cadre believed the doctrine would be the perfect solution
  for Afghanistan. All they needed was a general with enough charisma and political savvy to implement it.
  As McChrystal leaned on Obama to ramp up the war, he did it with the same fearlessness he used to track down terrorists
  in Iraq: Figure out how your enemy operates, be faster and more ruthless than everybody else, then take the fuckers out.
  After arriving in Afghanistan last June, the general conducted his own policy review, ordered up by Defense Secretary
  Robert Gates. The now-infamous report was leaked to the press, and its conclusion was dire: If we didn't send another
  40,000 troops — swelling the number of U.S. forces in Afghanistan by nearly half — we were in danger of "mission failure."
  The White House was furious. McChrystal, they felt, was trying to bully Obama, opening him up to charges of being weak
  on national security unless he did what the general wanted. It was Obama versus the Pentagon, and the Pentagon was
  determined to kick the president's ass.
  Last fall, with his top general calling for more troops, Obama launched a three-month review to re-evaluate the strategy in
  Afghanistan. "I found that time painful," McChrystal tells me in one of several lengthy interviews. "I was selling an
  unsellable position." For the general, it was a crash course in Beltway politics — a battle that pitted him against
  experienced Washington insiders like Vice President Biden, who argued that a prolonged counterinsurgency campaign in
  Afghanistan would plunge America into a military quagmire without weakening international terrorist networks. "The entire
  COIN strategy is a fraud perpetuated on the American people," says Douglas Macgregor, a retired colonel and leading
  critic of counterinsurgency who attended West Point with McChrystal. "The idea that we are going to spend a trillion
  dollars to reshape the culture of the Islamic world is utter nonsense.
  In the end, however, McChrystal got almost exactly what he wanted. On December 1st, in a speech at West Point, the
  president laid out all the reasons why fighting the war in Afghanistan is a bad idea: It's expensive; we're in an economic
  crisis; a decade-long commitment would sap American power; Al Qaeda has shifted its base of operations to Pakistan.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  Then, without ever using the words "victory" or "win," Obama announced that he would send an additional 30,000 troops
  to Afghanistan, almost as many as McChrystal had requested. The president had thrown his weight, however hesitantly,
  behind the counterinsurgency crowd.
  Today, as McChrystal gears up for an offensive in southern Afghanistan, the prospects for any kind of success look bleak.
  In June, the death toll for U.S. troops passed 1,000, and the number of IEDs has doubled. Spending hundreds of billions
  of dollars on the fifth-poorest country on earth has failed to win over the civilian population, whose attitude toward U.S.
  troops ranges from intensely wary to openly hostile. Thetiggest military operation of the year — a ferocious offensive that
  began in February to retake the southern town of Marja — continues to drag on, prompting McChrystal himself to refer to it
  as a "bleeding ulcer." In June, Afghanistan officially outpaced Vietnam as the longest war in American history — and
  Obama has quietly begun to back away from the deadline he set for withdrawing U.S. troops in July of next year. The
  president finds himself stuck in something even more insane than a quagmire: a quagmire he knowingly walked into, even
  though it's precisely the kind of gigantic, mind-numbing, multigenerational nation-building project he explicitly said he
  didn't want.
  Even those who support McChrystal and his strategy of counterinsurgency know that whatever the general manages to
  accomplish in Afghanistan, it's going to look more like Vietnam than Desert Storm. "It's not going to look like a win, smell
  like a win or taste like a win," says Maj. Gen. Bill Mayville, who serves as chief of operations for McChrystal. "This is going
  to end in an argument."
  The night after his speech in Paris, McChrystal and his staff head to Kitty O'Shea's, an Irish pub catering to tourists,
  around the corner from the hotel. His wife, Annie, has joined him for a rare visit: Since the Iraq War began in 2003, she
  has seen her husband less than 30 days a year. Though it is his and Annie's 33rd wedding anniversary, McChrystal has
  invited his inner circle along for dinner and drinks at the "least Gucci" place his staff could find. His wife isn't surprised.
  "He once took me to a Jack in the Box when I was dressed in formalwear," she says with a laugh.
  The general's staff is a handpicked collection of killers, spies, geniuses, patriots, political operators and outright maniacs.
  There's a former head of British Special Forces, two Navy Seals, an Afghan Special Forces commando, a lawyer, two
  fighter pilots and at least two dozen combat veterans and counterinsurgency experts. They jokingly refer to themselves as
  Team America, taking the name from the South Park-esque sendup of military cluelessness, and they pride themselves
  on their can-do attitude and their disdain for authority. After arriving in Kabul last summer, Team America set about
  changing the culture of the International Security Assistance Force, as the NATO-led mission is known. (U.S. soldiers had
  taken to deriding ISAF as short for "I Suck at Fighting" or "In Sandals and Flip-Flops.") McChrystal banned alcohol on
  base, kicked out Burger King and other symbols of American excess, expanded the morning briefing to include thousands
  of officers and refashioned the command center into a Situational Awareness Room, a free-flowing information hub
  modeled after Mayor Mike Bloomberg's offices in New York. He also set a manic pace for his staff, becoming legendary
  for sleeping four hours a night, running seven miles each morning, and eating one meal a day. (In the month I spend
  around the general, I witness him eating only once.) It's a kind of superhuman narrative that has built up around him, a
  staple in almost every media profile, as if the ability to go without sleep and food translates into the possibility of a man
  single-handedly winning the war.
  By midnight at Kitty O'Shea's, much of Team America is completely shitfaced. Two officers do an Irish jig mixed with steps
  from a traditional Afghan wedding dance, while McChrystal's top advisers lock arms and sing a slurred song of their own
  invention."Afghanistan!" they bellow."Afghanistan!" They call it their Afghanistan song.
  McChrystal steps away from the circle, observing his team. "All these men," he tells me. "I'd die for them. And they'd die
  for me."
  The assembled men may look and sound like a bunch of combat veterans letting off steam, but in fact this tight-knit group
  represents the most powerful force shaping U.S. policy in Afghanistan. While McChrystal and his men are in indisputable
  command of all military aspects of the war, there is no equivalent position on the diplomatic or political side. Instead, an
  assortment of administration players compete over the Afghan portfolio: U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry, Special
  Representative to Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke, National Security Advisor Jim Jones and Secretary of State Hillary
  Clinton, not to mention 40 or so other coalition ambassadors and a host of talking heads who try to insert themselves into
  the mess, from John Kerry to John McCain. This diplomatic incoherence has effectively allowed McChrystal's team to call
  the shots and hampered efforts to build a stable and credible government in Afghanistan. "It jeopardizes the mission,"
  says Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who supports McChrystal. "The military cannot
  by itself create governance reform."
  Part of the problem is structural: The Defense Department budget exceeds $600 billion a year, while the State
  Department receives only $50 billion. But part of the problem is personal: In private, Team McChrystal likes to talk shit
  about many of Obama's top people on the diplomatic side. One aide calls Jim Jones, a retired four-star general and
  veteran of the Cold War, a "clown" who remains "stuck in 1985." Politicians like McCain and Kerry, says another aide,
  "turn up, have a meeting with Karzai, criticize him at the airport press conference, then get back for the Sunday talk
  shows. Frankly, it's not very helpful." Only Hillary Clinton receives good reviews from McChrystal's inner circle. "Hillary
  had Stan's back during the strategic review," says an adviser. "She said, 'If Stan wants it, give him what he needs.'"
  McChrystal reserves special skepticism for Holbrooke, the official in charge of reintegrating the Taliban. "The Boss says
  he's like a wounded animal," says a member of the general's team. "Holbrooke keeps hearing rumors that he's going to
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  get fired, so that makes him dangerous. He's a brilliant guy, but he just comes in, pulls on a lever, whatever he can grasp
  onto. But this is COIN, and you can't just have someone yanking on shit."
  At one point on his trip to Paris, McChrystal checks his BlackBerry. "Oh, not another e-mail from Holbrooke," he groans. "I
  don't even want to open it." He clicks on the message and reads the salutation out loud, then stuffs the BladkBerry back in
  his pocket, not bothering to conceal his annoyance.
  "Make sure you don't get any of that on your leg," an aide jokes, referring to the e-mail.
  By far the most crucial — and strained — relationship is between McChrystal and Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador.
  According to those close to the two men, Eikenberry — a retired three-star general who served in Afghanistan in 2002 and
  2005 — can't stand that his former subordinate is now calling the shots. He's also furious that McChrystal, backed by
  NATO's allies, refused to put Eikenberry in the pivotal role of viceroy in Afghanistan, which would have made him the
  diplomatic equivalent of the general. The job instead went to British Ambassador Mark Sedwill — a move that effectively
  increased McChrystal's influence over diplomacy by shutting out a powerful rival. "In reality, that position needs to be filled
  by an American for it to have weight," says a U.S. official familiar with the negotiations.
  The relationship was further strained in January, when a classified cable that Eikenberry wrote was leaked to The New
  York Times. The cable was as scathing as it was prescient. The ambassador offered a brutal critique of McChrystal's
  strategy, dismissed President Hamid Karzai as "not an adequate strategic partner," and cast doubt on whether the
  counterinsurgency plan would be "sufficient" to deal with Al Qaeda. "We will become more deeply engaged here with no
  way to extricate ourselves," Eikenberry warned, "short of allowing the country to descend again into lawlessness and
  chaos."
  McChrystal and his team were blindsided by the cable. "I like Karl, I've known him for years, but they'd never said
  anything like that to us before," says McChrystal, who adds that he felt "betrayed" by the leak. "Here's one that covers his
  flank for the history books. Now if we fail, they can say, 'I told you so.'"
  The most striking example of McChrystal's usurpation of diplomatic policy is his handling of Karzai. It is McChrystal, not
  diplomats like Eikenberry or Holbrooke, who enjoys the best relationship with the man America is relying on to lead
  Afghanistan. The doctrine of counterinsurgency requires a credible government, and since Karzai is not considered
  credible by his own people, McChrystal has worked hard to make him so. Over the past few months, he has accompanied
  the president on more than 10 trips around the country, standing beside him at political meetings, or shuras, in Kandahar.
  In February, the day before the doomed offensive in Marja, McChrystal even drove over to the president's palace to get
  him to sign off on what would be the largest military operation of the year. Karzai's staff, however, insisted that the
  president was sleeping off a cold and could not be disturbed. After several hours of haggling, McChrystal finally enlisted
  the aid of Afghanistan's defense minister, who persuaded Karzai's people to wake the president from his nap.
  This is one of the central flaws with McChrystal's counterinsurgency strategy: The need to build a credible government
  puts us at the mercy of whatever tin-pot leader we've backed — a danger that Eikenberry explicitly warned about in his
  cable. Even Team McChrystal privately acknowledges that Karzai is a less-than-ideal partner. "He's been locked up in his
  palace the past year," laments one of the general's top advisers. At times, Karzai himself has actively undermined
  McChrystal's desire to put him in charge. During a recent visit to Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Karzai met three U.S.
  soldiers who had been wounded in Uruzgan province. "General," he called out to McChrystal, "I didn't even know we were
  fighting in Uruzgan!"
  Growing up as a military brat, McChrystal exhibited the mixture of brilliance and cockiness that would follow him
  throughout his career. His father fought in Korea and Vietnam, retiring as a two-star general, and his four brothers all
  joined the armed services. Moving around to different bases, McChrystal took solace in baseball, a sport in which he
  made no pretense of hiding his superiority: In Little League, he would call out strikes to the crowd before whipping a
  fastball down the middle.
  McChrystal entered West Point in 1972, when the U.S. military was close to its all-time low in popularity. His class was the
  last to graduate before the academy started to admit women. The "Prison on the Hudson," as it was known then, was a
  potent mix of testosterone, hooliganism and reactionary patriotism. Cadets repeatedly trashed the mess hall in food fights,
  and birthdays were celebrated with a tradition called "rat fucking," which often left the birthday boy outside in the snow or
  mud, covered in shaving cream. "It was pretty out of control," says Lt. Gen. David Barno, a classmate who went on to
  serve as the top commander in Afghanistan from 2003 to 2005. The class, filled with what Barno calls "huge talent" and
  "wild-eyed teenagers with a strong sense of idealism," also produced Gen. Ray Odierno, the current commander of U.S.
  forces in Iraq.
  The son of a general, McChrystal was also a ringleader of the campus dissidents — a dual role that taught him how to
  thrive in a rigid, top-down environment while thumbing his nose at authority every chance he got. He accumulated more
  than 100 hours of demerits for drinking, partying and insubordination — a record that his classmates boasted made him a
  "century man." One classmate, who asked not to be named, recalls finding McChrystal passed out in the shower after
  downing a case of beer he had hidden under the sink. The troublemaking almost got him kicked out, and he spent hours
  subjected to forced marches in the Area, a paved courtyard where unruly cadets were disciplined. "I'd come visit, and I'd
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  end up spending most of my time in the library, while Stan was in the Area," recalls Annie, who began dating McChrystal
  in 1973.
  McChrystal wound up ranking 298 out of a class of 855, a serious underachievement for a man widely regarded as
  brilliant. His most compelling work was extracurricular: As managing editor of The Pointer, the West Point literary
  magazine, McChrystal wrote seven short stories that eerily foreshadow many of the issues he would confront in his
  career. In one tale, a fictional officer complains about the difficulty of training foreign troops to fight; in another, a 19-year-
  old soldier kills a boy he mistakes for a terrorist. In "Brinkman's Note," a piece of suspense fiction, the unnamed narrator
  appears to be trying to stop a plot to assassinate the president. It turns out, however, that the narrator himself is the
  assassin, and he's able to infiltrate the White House: "The President strode in smiling. From the right coat pocket of the
  raincoat I carried, I slowly drew forth my 32-caliber pistol. In Brinkman's failure, I had succeeded."
  After graduation, 2nd Lt. Stanley McChrystal entered an Army that was all but broken in the wake of Vietnam. "We really
  felt we were a peacetime generation," he recalls. "There was the Gulf War, but even that didn't feel like that big of a deal."
  So McChrystal spent his career where the action was: He enrolled in Special Forces school and became a regimental
  commander of the 3rd Ranger Battalion in 1986. It was a dangerous position, even in peacetime — nearly two dozen
  Rangers were killed in training accidents during the Eighties. It was also an unorthodox career path: Most soldiers who
  want to climb the ranks to general don't go into the Rangers. Displaying a penchant for transforming systems he considers
  outdated, McChrystal set out to revolutionize the training regime for the Rangers. He introduced mixed martial arts,
  required every soldier to qualify with night-vision goggles on the rifle range and forced troops to build up their endurance
  with weekly marches involving heavy backpacks.
  In the late 1990s, McChrystal shrewdly improved his inside game, spending a year at Harvard's Kennedy School of
  Government and then at the Council on Foreign Relations, where he co-authored a treatise on the merits and drawbacks
  of humanitarian interventionism. But as he moved up through the ranks, McChrystal relied on the skills he had learned as
  a troublemaking kid at West Point: knowing precisely how far he could go in a rigid military hierarchy without getting
  tossed out. Being a highly intelligent badass, he discovered, could take you far — especially in the political chaos that
  followed September 11th. "He was very focused," says Annie. "Even as a young officer he seemed to know what he
  wanted to do. I don't think his personality has changed in all these years."
  By some accounts, McChrystal's career should have been over at least two times by now. As Pentagon spokesman
  during the invasion of Iraq, the general seemed more like a White House mouthpiece than an up-and-coming commander
  with a reputation for speaking his mind. When Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld made his infamous "stuff happens"
  remark during the looting of Baghdad, McChrystal backed him up. A few days later, he echoed the president's Mission
  Accomplished gaffe by insisting that major combat operations in Iraq were over. But it was during his next stint —
  overseeing the military's most elite units, including the Rangers, Navy Seals and Delta Force — that McChrystal took part
  in a cover-up that would have destroyed the career of a lesser man.
  After Cpl. Pat Tillman, the former-NFL-star-turned-Ranger, was accidentally killed by his own troops in Afghanistan in April
  2004, McChrystal took an active role in creating the impression that Tillman had died at the hands of Taliban fighters. He
  signed off on a falsified recommendation for a Silver Star that suggested Tillman had been killed by enemy fire.
  (McChrystal would later claim he didn't read the recommendation closely enough — a strange excuse for a commander
  known for his laserlike attention to minute details.) A week later, McChrystal sent a memo up the chain of command,
  specifically warning that President Bush should avoid mentioning the cause of Tillman's death. "If the circumstances of
  Corporal Tillman's death become public," he wrote, it could cause "public embarrassment" for the president.
  "The false narrative, which McChrystal clearly helped construct, diminished Pat's true actions," wrote Tillman's mother,
  Mary, in her book Boots on the Ground by Dusk. McChrystal got away with it, she added, because he was the "golden
  boy" of Rumsfeld and Bush, who loved his willingness to get things done, even if it included bending the rules or skipping
  the chain of command. Nine days after Tillman's death, McChrystal was promoted to major general.
  Two years later, in 2006, McChrystal was tainted by a scandal involving detainee abuse and torture at Camp Nama in
  Iraq. According to a report by Human Rights Watch, prisoners at the camp were subjected to a now-familiar litany of
  abuse: stress positions, being dragged naked through the mud. McChrystal was not disciplined in the scandal, even
  though an interrogator at the camp reported seeing him inspect the prison multiple times. But the experience was so
  unsettling to McChrystal that he tried to prevent detainee operations from being placed under his command in
  Afghanistan, viewing them as a "political swamp," according to a U.S. official. In May 2009, as McChrystal prepared for
  his confirmation hearings, his staff prepared him for hard questions about Camp Nama and the Tillman cover-up. But the
  scandals barely made a ripple in Congress, and McChrystal was soon on his way back to Kabul to run the war in
  Afghanistan.
  The media, to a large extent, have also given McChrystal a pass on both controversies. Where Gen. Petraeus is kind of a
  dweeb, a teacher's pet with a Ranger's tab, McChrystal is a snake-eating rebel, a "Jedi" commander, as Newsweek called
  him. He didn't care when his teenage son came home with blue hair and a mohawk. He speaks his mind with a candor
  rare for a high-ranking official. He asks for opinions, and seems genuinely interested in the response. He gets briefings on
  his iPod and listens to books on tape. He carries a custom-made set of nunchucks in his convoy engraved with his name
  and four stars, and his itinerary often bears a fresh quote from Bruce Lee. ("There are no limits. There are only plateaus,
  and you must not stay there, you must go beyond them.") He went out on dozens of nighttime raids during his time in Iraq,
  unprecedented for a top commander, and turned up on missions unannounced, with almost no entourage. "The fucking
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  lads love Stan McChrystal," says a British officer who serves in Kabul. "You'd be out in Somewhere, Iraq, and someone
  would take a knee beside you, and a corporal would be like 'Who the fuck is that?' And it's fucking Stan McChrystal."
  It doesn't hurt that McChrystal was also extremely successful as head of the Joint Special Operations Command, the elite
  forces that carry out the government's darkest ops. During the Iraq surge, his team killed and captured thousands of
  insurgents, including Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. "JSOC was a killing machine," says Maj. Gen.
  Mayville, his chief of operations. McChrystal was also open to new ways of killing. He systematically mapped out terrorist
  networks, targeting specific insurgents and hunting them down — often with the help of cyberfreaks traditionally shunned
  by the military. "The Boss would find the 24-year-old kid with a nose ring, with some fucking brilliant degree from MIT,
  sitting in the corner with 16 computer monitors humming," says a Special Forces commando who worked with McChrystal
  in Iraq and now serves on his staff in Kabul. "He'd say, 'Hey — you fucking muscleheads couldn't find lunch without help.
  You got to work together with these guys.'"
  Even in his new role as America's leading evangelist for counterinsurgency, McChrystal retains the deep-seated instincts
  of a terrorist hunter. To put pressure on the Taliban, he has upped the number of Special Forces units in Afghanistan from
  four to 19. "You better be out there hitting four or five targets tonight," McChrystal will tell a Navy Seal he sees in the
  hallway at headquarters. Then he'll add, "I'm going to have to scold you in the morning for it, though." In fact, the general
  frequently finds himself apologizing for the disastrous consequences of counterinsurgency. In the first four months of this
  year, NATO forces killed some 90 civilians, up 76 percent from the same period in 2009 — a record that has created
  tremendous resentment among the very population that COIN theory is intent on winning over. In February, a Special
  Forces night raid ended in the deaths of two pregnant Afghan women and allegations of a cover-up, and in April, protests
  erupted in Kandahar after U.S. forces accidentally shot up a bus, killing five Afghans. "We've shot an amazing number of
  people," McChrystal recently conceded.
  Despite the tragedies and miscues, McChrystal has issued some of the strictest directives to avoid civilian casualties that
  the U.S. military has ever encountered in a war zone. It's "insurgent math," as he calls it — for every innocent person you
  kill, you create 10 new enemies. He has ordered convoys to curtail their reckless driving, put restrictions on the use of air
  power and severely limited night raids. He regularly apologizes to Hamid Karzai when civilians are killed, and berates
  commanders responsible for civilian deaths. "For a while," says one U.S. official, "the most dangerous place to be in
  Afghanistan was in front of McChrystal after a 'civ cas' incident." The ISAF command has even discussed ways to make
  not killing into something you can win an award for: There's talk of creating a new medal for "courageous restraint," a
  buzzword that's unlikely to gain much traction in the gung-ho culture of the U.S. military.
  But however strategic they may be, McChrystal's new marching orders have caused an intense backlash among his own
  troops. Being told to hold their fire, soldiers complain, puts them in greater danger. "Bottom line?" says a former Special
  Forces operator who has spent years in Iraq and Afghanistan. "I would love to kick McChrystal in the nuts. His rules of
  engagement put soldiers' lives in even greater danger. Every real soldier will tell you the same thing."
  In March, McChrystal traveled to Combat Outpost JFM — a small encampment on the outskirts of Kandahar — to confront
  such accusations from the troops directly. It was a typically bold move by the general. Only two days earlier, he had
  received an e-mail from Israel Arroyo, a 25-year-old staff sergeant who asked McChrystal to go on a mission with his unit.
  "I am writing because it was said you don't care about the troops and have made it harder to defend ourselves," Arroyo
  wrote.
  Within hours, McChrystal responded personally: "I'm saddened by the accusation that I don't care about soldiers, as it is
  something I suspect any soldier takes both personally and professionally — at least I do. But I know perceptions depend
  upon your perspective at the time, and I respect that every soldier's view is his own." Then he showed up at Arroyo's
  outpost and went on a foot patrol with the troops — not some bullshit photo-op stroll through a market, but a real live
  operation in a dangerous war zone.
  Six weeks later, just before McChrystal returned from Paris, the general received another e-mail from Arroyo. A 23-year-
  old corporal named Michael Ingram — one of the soldiers McChrystal had gone on patrol with — had been killed by an IED
  a day earlier. It was the third man the 25-member platoon had lost in a year, and Arroyo was writing to see if the general
  would attend Ingram's memorial service. "He started to look up to you," Arroyo wrote. McChrystal said he would try to
  make it down to pay his respects as soon as possible.
  The night before the general is scheduled to visit Sgt. Arroyo's platoon for the memorial, I arrive at Combat Outpost JFM
  to speak with the soldiers he had gone on patrol with. JFM is a small encampment, ringed by high blast walls and guard
  towers. Almost all of the soldiers here have been on repeated combat tours in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and have seen
  some of the worst fighting of both wars. But they are especially angered by Ingram's death. His commanders had
  repeatedly requested permission to tear down the house where Ingram was killed, noting that it was often used as a
  combat position by the Taliban. But due to McChrystal's new restrictions to avoid upsetting civilians, the request had been
  denied. "These were abandoned houses," fumes Staff Sgt. Kennith Hicks. "Nobody was coming back to live in them."
  One soldier shows me the list of new regulations the platoon was given. "Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably
  certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force," the laminated card reads. For a soldier who has
  traveled halfway around the world to fight, that's like telling a cop he should only patrol in areas where he knows he won't
  have to make arrests. "Does that make any fucking sense?" asks Pfc. Jared Pautsch. "We should just drop a fucking
  bomb on this place. You sit and ask yourself: What are we doing here?"
  The rules handed out here are not what McChrystal intended — they've been distorted as they passed through the chain of
  command — but knowing that does nothing to lessen the anger of troops on the ground. "Fuck, when I came over here and
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  heard that McChrystal was in charge, I thought we would get our fucking gun on," says Hicks, who has served three tours
  of combat. "I get COIN. I get all that. McChrystal comes here, explains it, it makes sense. But then he goes away on his
  bird, and by the time his directives get passed down to us through Big Army, they're all fucked up — either because
  somebody is trying to cover their ass, or because they just don't understand it themselves. But we're fucking losing this
  thing."
  McChrystal and his team show up the next day. Underneath a tent, the general has a 45-minute discussion with some two
  dozen soldiers. The atmosphere is tense. "I ask you what's going on in your world, and I think it's important for you all to
  understand the big picture as well," McChrystal begins. "How's the company doing? You guys feeling sorry for
  yourselves? Anybody? Anybody feel like you're losing?" McChrystal says.
  "Sir, some of the guys here, sir, think we're losing, sir," says Hicks.
  McChrystal nods. "Strength is leading when you just don't want to lead," he tells the men. "You're leading by example.
  That's what we do. Particularly when it's really, really hard, and it hurts inside." Then he spends 20 minutes talking about
  counterinsurgency, diagramming his concepts and principles on a whiteboard. He makes COIN seem like common sense,
  but he's careful not to bullshit the men. "We are knee-deep in the decisive year," he tells them. The Taliban, he insists, no
  longer has the initiative — "but I don't think we do, either." It's similar to the talk he gave in Paris, but it's not winning any
  hearts and minds among the soldiers. "This is the philosophical part that works with think tanks," McChrystal tries to joke.
  "But it doesn't get the same reception from infantry companies."
  During the question-and-answer period, the frustration boils over. The soldiers complain about not being allowed to use
  lethal force, about watching insurgents they detain be freed for lack of evidence. They want to be able to fight — like they
  did in Iraq, like they had in Afghanistan before McChrystal. 'We aren't putting fear into the Taliban," one soldier says.
  "Winning hearts and minds in COIN is a coldblooded thing," McChrystal says, citing an oft-repeated maxim that you can't
  kill your way out of Afghanistan. "The Russians killed 1 million Afghans, and that didn't work."
  "I'm not saying go out and kill everybody, sir," the soldier persists. "You say we've stopped the momentum of the
  insurgency. I don't believe that's true in this area. The more we pull back, the more we restrain ourselves, the stronger it's
  getting."
  "I agree with you," McChrystal says. "In this area, we've not made progress, probably. You have to show strength here,
  you have to use fire. What I'm telling you is, fire costs you. What do you want to do? You want to wipe the population out
  here and resettle it?"
  A soldier complains that under the rules, any insurgent who doesn't have a weapon is immediately assumed to be a
  civilian. "That's the way this game is," McChrystal says. "It's complex. I can't just decide: It's shirts and skins, and we'll kill
  all the shirts."
  As the discussion ends, McChrystal seems to sense that he hasn't succeeded at easing the men's anger. He makes one
  last-ditch effort to reach them, acknowledging the death of Cpl. Ingram. "There's no way I can make that easier," he tells
  them. "No way I can pretend it won't hurt. No way I can tell you not to feel that. . . . I will tell you, you're doing a great job.
  Don't let the frustration get to you." The session ends with no clapping, and no real resolution. McChrystal may have sold
  President Obama on counterinsurgency, but many of his own men aren't buying it.
  When it comes to Afghanistan, history is not on McChrystal's side. The only foreign invader to have any success here
  was Genghis Khan — and he wasn't hampered by things like human rights, economic development and press scrutiny.
  The COIN doctrine, bizarrely, draws inspiration from some of the biggest Western military embarrassments in recent
  memory: France's nasty war in Algeria (lost in 1962) and the American misadventure in Vietnam (lost in 1975).
  McChrystal, like other advocates of COIN, readily acknowledges that counterinsurgency campaigns are inherently messy,
  expensive and easy to lose. "Even Afghans are confused by Afghanistan," he says. But even if he somehow manages to
  succeed, after years of bloody fighting with Afghan kids who pose no threat to the U.S. homeland, the war will do little to
  shut down Al Qaeda, which has shifted its operations to Pakistan. Dispatching 150,000 troops to build new schools,
  roads, mosques and water-treatment facilities around Kandahar is like trying to stop the drug war in Mexico by occupying
  Arkansas and building Baptist churches in Little Rock. "It's all very cynical, politically," says Marc Sageman, a former CIA
  case officer who has extensive experience in the region. "Afghanistan is not in our vital interest — there's nothing for us
  there."
  In mid-May, two weeks after visiting the troops in Kandahar, McChrystal travels to the White House for a high-level visit by
  Hamid Karzai. It is a triumphant moment for the general, one that demonstrates he is very much in command — both in
  Kabul and in Washington. In the East Room, which is packed with journalists and dignitaries, President Obama sings the
  praises of Karzai. The two leaders talk about how great their relationship is, about the pain they feel over civilian
  casualties. They mention the word "progress" 16 times in under an hour. But there is no mention of victory. Still, the •
  session represents the most forceful commitment that Obama has made to McChrystal's strategy in months. "There is no
  denying the progress that the Afghan people have made in recent years — in education, in health care and economic
  development," the president says. "As I saw in the lights across Kabul when I landed — lights that would not have been
  visible just a few years earlier."
  It is a disconcerting observation for Obama to make. During the worst years in Iraq, when the Bush administration had no
  real progress to point to, officials used to offer up the exact same evidence of success. "It was one of our first
  impressions," one GOP official said in 2006, after landing in Baghdad at the height of the sectarian violence. "So many
  lights shining brightly." So it is to the language of the Iraq War that the Obama administration has turned — talk of
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015

  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015
  progress, of city lights, of metrics like health care and education. Rhetoric that just a few years ago they would have
  mocked. "They are trying to manipulate perceptions because there is no definition of victory — because victory is not even
  defined or recognizable," says Celeste Ward, a senior defense analyst at the RAND Corporation who served as a political
  adviser to U.S. commanders in Iraq in 2006. "That's the game we're in right now. What we need, for strategic purposes, is
  to create the perception that we didn't get run off. The facts on the ground are not great, and are not going to become
  great in the near future."
  But facts on the ground, as history has proven, offer little deterrent to a military determined to stay the course. Even those
  closest to McChrystal know that the rising anti-war sentiment at home doesn't begin to reflect how deeply fucked up things
  are in Afghanistan. "If Americans pulled back and started paying attention to this war, it would become even less popular,"
  a senior adviser to McChrystal says. Such realism, however, doesn't prevent advocates of counterinsurgency from
  dreaming big: Instead of beginning to withdraw troops next year, as Obama promised, the military hopes to ramp up its
  counterinsurgency campaign even further. "There's a possibility we could ask for another surge of U.S. forces next
  summer if we see success here," a senior military official in Kabul tells me.
  Back in Afghanistan, less than a month after the White House meeting with Karzai and all the talk of "progress,"
  McChrystal is hit by the biggest blow to his vision of counterinsurgency. Since last year, the Pentagon had been planning
  to launch a major military operation this summer in Kandahar, the country's second-largest city and the Taliban's original
  home base. It was supposed to be a decisive turning point in the war — the primary reason for the troop surge that
  McChrystal wrested from Obama late last year. But on June 10th, acknowledging that the military still needs to lay more
  groundwork, the general announced that he is postponing the offensive until the fall. Rather than one big battle, like
  Fallujah or Ramadi, U.S. troops will implement what McChrystal calls a "rising tide of security." The Afghan police and
  army will enter Kandahar to attempt to seize control of neighborhoods, while the U.S. pours $90 million of aid into the city
  to win over the civilian population.
  Even proponents of counterinsurgency are hard-pressed to explain the new plan. "This isn't a classic operation," says a
  U.S. military official. "It's not going to be Black Hawk Down. There aren't going to be doors kicked in." Other U.S. officials
  insist that doors are going to be kicked in, but that it's going to be a kinder, gentler offensive than the disaster in Marja.
  "The Taliban have a jackboot on the city," says a military official. "We have to remove them, but we have to do it in a way
  that doesn't alienate the population." When Vice President Biden was briefed on the new plan in the Oval Office, insiders
  say he was shocked to see how much it mirrored the more gradual plan of counterterrorism that he advocated last fall.
  "This looks like CT-plus!" he said, according to U.S. officials familiar with the meeting.
  Whatever the nature of the new plan, the delay underscores the fundamental flaws of counterinsurgency. After nine years
  of war, the Taliban simply remains too strongly entrenched for the U.S. military to openly attack. The very people that
  COIN seeks to win over — the Afghan people — do not want us there. Our supposed ally, President Karzai, used his
  influence to delay the offensive, and the massive influx of aid championed by McChrystal is likely only to make things
  worse. "Throwing money at the problem exacerbates the problem," says Andrew Wilder, an expert at Tufts University who
  has studied the effect of aid in southern Afghanistan. "A tsunami of cash fuels corruption, delegitimizes the government
  and creates an environment where we're picking winners and losers" — a process that fuels resentment and hostility
  among the civilian population. So far, counterinsurgency has succeeded only in creating a never-ending demand for the
  primary product supplied by the military: perpetual war. There is a reason that President Obama studiously avoids using
  the word "victory" when he talks about Afghanistan. Winning, it would seem, is not really possible. Not even with
  Stanley McChrystal in charge.
  This article originally appeared in RS 1108/1109 from July 8-22, 2010.
  UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2014-20439 Doc No. C05769954 Date: 08/31/2015



