Re: Subpoena Issuance

From:robbymook@gmail.com To: pir@hrcoffice.com CC: nmerrill@hrcoffice.com, jennifer.m.palmieri@gmail.com, cheryl.mills@gmail.com, john.podesta@gmail.com, hsamuelson@cdmillsgroup.com, jake.sullivan@gmail.com Date: 2015-03-04 21:13 Subject: Re: Subpoena Issuance

I'm sorry, I'm confused--what is it that we are saying we want to do? Release everything or just release what the committee has requested? Cheryl, I have one other thing I'd like to ask about quickly if you have a sec to chat. > On Mar 4, 2015, at 6:10 PM, Philippe Reines <pir@hrcoffice.com> wrote: > > We’re on with David. > > Yes they have everything, but they don’t believe they have everything. But no, they are not asking for all 55k. But nevertheless gives us an excuse. > > Going to draft a Tweet that states the intention. > > > From: Nick Merrill > Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 6:07 PM > To: Jennifer Palmieri, CDM > Cc: Philippe Reines, Heather Samuelson, Jake Sullivan > Subject: Re: Subpoena Issuance > > I’m sorry but a point of clarification here. Two actually. > > The committee already has all the relevant documents, but we’re to take the below as them subpoena’ing everything? > > And in addition, does everything mean everything we turned over, or her entire email history, whether or not it was turned over? > > From: Jennifer Palmieri <jennifer.m.palmieri@gmail.com> > Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 6:04 PM > To: Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com> > Cc: Philippe Reines <pir@hrcoffice.com>, NSM <nmerrill@hrcoffice.com>, Jennifer Palmieri <jennifer.m.palmieri@gmail.com>, Heather Samuelson <hsamuelson@cdmillsgroup.com>, Jacob Sullivan <Jake.sullivan@gmail.com> > Subject: Re: Subpoena Issuance > > But we still need to hold till you talk with State, right? > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Mar 4, 2015, at 6:01 PM, Cheryl Mills <cheryl.mills@gmail.com> wrote: > >> agree >> >>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Philippe Reines <pir@hrcoffice.com> wrote: >>> Not as flippantly, and maybe just from Nick’s mouth — but rather than going around and around on how to release the 55k, let’s just be for what’s happening and use this as the excuse. Because we can say even if State has equities, not providing them would put her in legal jeopardy. OR, we say happy for them to have it, happy for the public to read them as soon as State is comforrtable. But let’s somehow take advantage of this. >>> >>> >>> From: CDM >>> Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 5:52 PM >>> To: Philippe Reines >>> Cc: Nick Merrill, Jennifer Palmieri, Heather Samuelson, Jake Sullivan >>> Subject: Re: Subpoena Issuance >>> >>> seriously? >>> >>>> On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Philippe Reines <pir@hrcoffice.com> wrote: >>>> Should just Tweet: No need for this, happy for you to have what I gave State. If they can’t, I will. Bring a dolly! >>>> >>>> From: Nick Merrill >>>> Date: Wednesday, March 4, 2015 at 5:36 PM >>>> To: CDM, Jennifer Palmieri, Philippe Reines, Heather Samuelson >>>> Subject: Subpoena Issuance >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Duvall, Amanda (Infield) [mailto:Amanda.Duvall@mail.house.gov] >>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 04, 2015 5:25 PM >>>> To: Duvall, Amanda (Infield); Ware, Jamal >>>> Subject: Statement from the Communications Director on Subpoena Issuance >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <image001.png> >>>> >>>> FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: >>>> >>>> Date: March 4, 2015 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Contact: >>>> >>>> Jamal D. Ware >>>> >>>> 202-226-7100 >>>> >>>> Amanda Duvall >>>> >>>> 202-225-6030 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Statement from the Communications Director on Subpoena Issuance >>>> >>>> Washington, DC- Select Committee on Benghazi Communications Director Jamal D. Ware issued the following statement regarding the issuance of a subpoena for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails: >>>> >>>> “The Select Committee on Benghazi today issued subpoenas for all communications of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton related to Libya and to the State Department for other individuals who have information pertinent to the investigation. The Committee also has issued preservation letters to internet firms informing them of their legal obligation to protect all relevant documents.” >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ###