WikiLeaks Email: Clinton Campaign Plotting Against Bernie With Tax Exempt 501(C)3 Environmental Group

If you are reading through the WikiLeaks emails that have been flooding out, the internal workings of the Clinton Campaign are nothing short of breathtaking in their total disregard of laws and rules.

In one email, several people are discussing Hillary Clinton’s tightrope walk between her support of fracking and her love of money from oil and how to strike a balance with the Bernie Sanders supporters who are raving conservationists. It puts her in a position of hypocrisy between the Democratic mainstay of destroying all things related to big oil and the Environmental kooks who would do away with all fossil fuels if we let them. And of course Bernie Sanders was well known fo rhis refusal to take any money at all from the evil oil industry.

The email in question was written on February 23, 2016 at a time when Hillary was deeply worried that Bernie might upset her coronation and was a far tougher opponent than she expected.

This email thread was due to the fact that Sanders released a YouTube video (which has since been taken down) that was playing in Colorado. It has to do with fracking and the environment. The text of the ad was:

Bernie Sanders. The courage to stand up to Big Oil, because he won’t take their money. That’s why Sanders said no to the Keystone pipeline, and never waffled. He’s also the only candidate to oppose fracking, because fracking can endanger our drinking water and threaten our climate. Sanders has the most far reaching plan to fight climate change and build a clean energy future. Bernie Sanders. People before polluters. Sanders: I’m Bernie Sanders and I approve this message.

I would prefer an ally (congressman polis and/or LCV) Who have strong bone
fides on the environment to whack sander’s for taking an irresponsible
position and in doing so, threatening real progress on frack fluid
disclosure and air quality regulations. This is yet another promise he
can’t keep.

I think we will be forced to weigh in by sanders and of course we have to
state our position: it’s a transitional energy–and we need to go green.
But that is a very soft response that sounds better if Bernie is being hit
by the left.

I would watch our tone and not sound too pro-fracking. A reluctant tone is
a better fit for dem caucus goers (it’s a transition energy. It’s not great
but it allows us to get to where we want to be)

Brad and I just chatted. We think the following posture makes sense:

“Bernie’s call for banning all hydraulic fracturing is, extreme, unfeasible
and ignores the contribution natural gas has made to our economy and our
efforts to reduce carbon pollution. What we need to focus on is putting in
place common sense safeguards to protect our air and water, like mandatory
disclosure of fracking chemicals, closing the Halliburton loophole,
regulations to reduce methane emissions from both new and existing sources.
Hillary has called for all of these things to make sure that those
communities that choose to pursue natural gas development do so safely and
responsibly. And she will stand by those communities that decide they don’t
want natural gas production to occur.”

Did I capture it Brad? We are seeing if some progressive allies can hit
Bernie for being too extreme on this.

The Denver Post Editorial Board could really smack him for this.  This is
tricky waters for caucus goers but his language may leave him vulnerable.

I am going to quietly check with Conservation Colorado (the state LCV) and
see if they have an appetite for pushing back on Sanders.

I think the Denver Post Ed Board could smack Sanders if we want them to but
that makes it a bigger fight.

For legal purposes, our corporate name is Conservation Colorado Education Fund. We are an IRS-approved 501(c)3 non-profit charitable organization; our tax exempt identification number is 84-0614285.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. Contributions to political campaign funds or public statements of position (verbal or written) made on behalf of the organization in favor of or in opposition to any candidate for public office clearly violate the prohibition against political campaign activity.  Violating this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes.

Just got off with Brad and filled him in on LiUNA/labor drama. LCV isn’t willing to hit Bernie on this. Sounds like Polis is the best bet if press stats asking, otherwise better to duck and cover.