FW: FYI

From:MirandaL@dnc.org To: PaustenbachM@dnc.org Date: 2016-05-19 16:51 Subject: FW: FYI

Let's talk... ----- Susan Crabtree. You have her info? > On May 19, 2016, at 2:47 PM, Miranda, Luis <MirandaL@dnc.org> wrote: > > Thanks for flagging. Who was the reporter? > > I didn't lobby. I provided public affairs services, and to the extent I was in touch with the White House, it was as an ally, being supportive of what the White House was already doing. Any lobbying strategy was handled by my clients without me. > > > > > ----- > From: Friedman, Jennifer B. EOP/WHO [mailto:Jennifer_B_Friedman@who.eop.gov] > Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 2:36 PM > To: Miranda, Luis > Subject: FYI > > Wanted to give you a heads up on this exchange from the briefing where your name came up (toward the end). We don't plan to engage further. > > > **Draft** > > Susan, I'll give you the last one. > > Q Thank you, Josh. Two things. While you were out here in the briefing, it seems like CNN -- I'm looking on Twitter here so I can't be quite sure -- is reporting that U.S. officials are saying that the early belief is that a bomb brought the plane down -- the Egypt airplane down. I'm wondering if you can confirm that they've found wreckage and whether that -- if you could confirm that U.S. officials are believing this is a bomb. > > MR. EARNEST: Well, I saw some of that reporting before I walked out here and I don't have an intelligence assessment to share at this point. > > Q Okay. The second question is a little more complicated. I'm wondering if -- I know that at the beginning of the administration the President really stressed the importance of not including lobbyists coming into the administration -- there were some exceptions. But does he feel the same way about it when -- does he have the same concern when officials leave the administration? That when they become lobbyists, do they need to sign up and be transparent about that disclosure? > > MR. EARNEST: Well, Susan, I don't have the details in front of me, but I know that some of the restrictions that the President put in place on his first day in office didn't just apply to individuals who might be considering employment in the federal government during the Obama administration; there were also commitments that incoming administration officials had to make about limiting their lobbying activities after leaving government. And so there are prohibitions, or at least limitations, that apply to former Obama administration officials. > > Q Does the White House advise people leaving, do they remind them of that and their requirements? Is there a process -- > > MR. EARNEST: Yes, there is -- as part of the out-boarding process, you're reminded of the commitments that you've made on the way in that would limit your job prospects on the way out. And look, many people have raised concerns about how historically there's been a revolving door between the federal government and K Street. And the President's efforts, again, that he initiated on his first day in office were to close that revolving door, both in terms of the impact it has on people seeking to enter the government, but also based on restrictions that individuals committed to on their way out. > > Q It's not just K Street that these individuals are going to. I'm wondering if the -- anybody left the White House that went to go on and lobby on behalf of engagement in Cuba, if -- and they're contacting administration officials, should they have registered to lobby? > > MR. EARNEST: Well, again, I assume -- it sounds now like you're asking about a specific case, and why don't we just walk through the details and -- help you understand how the rules might apply in a particular case. > > Q Sure. Luis Miranda left the White House. He went to the ** Group. He did, from what I understand, engage in contacting the White House on that issue repeatedly, and from what I understand there's no lobbying disclosure records to show for that. I have written about this, but we've talked about a lot -- there's been a lot of discussion about the Iran narrative this week, but there hasn't been a lot of discussion about the -- and the timeline -- and there hasn't been a lot of discussion about the Cuba timeline and what -- the transparency on those negotiations. That's why I'm asking. > > MR. EARNEST: Okay. Well, look, we can take a look and see if we can provide you some additional information. It sounds like -- I'm not sure that any of that disclosure would apply to the administration, but we can take a look. > > Q To Luis Miranda specifically? > > MR. EARNEST: Well, he doesn't work here anymore. > > Q Right, so that's why -- > > MR. EARNEST: So maybe you should go ask him. > > Q Right, I've tried to contact him and -- ** I've tried to contact him. > > MR. EARNEST: Okay. > > Q Is it important for the White House to have some level of -- on the Cuba issue to have had some level of surprise on that issue? Or I mean, is it the President's right and the White House's right to -- and the State Department -- to engage in diplomacy behind the scenes before announcing a major initiative like trying to normalize relations with Cuba or another country? > > MR. EARNEST: Yes, I think that's entirely appropriate. And that certainly has applied to other diplomatic breakthroughs that have been -- that the United States has benefitted from in just the last couple of years. And when we were negotiating to secure the release of Americans who were being unjustly held in Iran, that was not something that we discussed extensively in the past. When the United States was working behind the scenes with China to get them to make some significant commitments to fight carbon pollution in their country, that I think -- the results of those negotiations I think were a surprise to many in the public, but the United States enjoyed significant benefits as a result. > > Those kinds of negotiations, that kind of diplomacy is often most effective when it's done behind the scenes, as you described it. > > Thanks, everybody.