Clinton aides considered moving CA primary

Good morning! We spent Friday digging through WikiLeaks, so our two top stories today are the best of what we found. Not included, though, is how those in Clinton World feel about Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti. 

Moving on.

Prominent Democratic strategists who would eventually get top posts in Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign debated the political strategy of moving the date of California’s primary election, according to hacked emails recently released by WikiLeaks.

They even reached out to the leader of the state Senate, Kevin de Leon. His response, if there was one, was not in the batch of emails.

CalWatchdog has more.

In other news:

• “Knowing that a major climate-change measure was in trouble, Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon sought help from the White House in 2015, according to a WikiLeaks email dump on Thursday.” CalWatchdog has more. 

• “Nearly 10,000 California National Guard soldiers have been ordered to repay huge enlistment bonuses a decade after signing up to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan, a newspaper reported Saturday.” The San Jose Mercury News/AP has more. 

• “No California ballot fight has attracted more money or bigger names than Proposition 61. Proponents call it the only initiative in the country that could rein in rising drug prices. Pharmaceutical companies have spent nearly $110 million to oppose it. But politics aside, experts see a problem with the measure. They question whether California could implement the law and what the consequences would be, if it can’t.” Capital Public Radio has more.

• “Critics of a California workers’ compensation system that is both among the nation’s costliest and not particularly good at providing care to injured employees are enjoying two triumphs” — new laws to help fight fraud. CalWatchdog has more.

Legislature:

• Gone till December.

Gov. Brown: 

• No public events announced.

Tips: matt@calwatchdog.com

Follow us: @calwatchdog @mflemingterp

New follower: @Lenny_Mendonca

A transcript of a voicemail for John Podesta — at the time a top adviser to Obama — shows the Los Angeles Democrat asking if the president could mention Senate Bill 350 during a then-upcoming speech on clean energy in Nevada.

“Appreciate you taking my call,” de Leon said, according to the transcript. “Appreciate you telling me that the President will be in LV on Monday. It’s his hope [sic] that the President can make some sort of announcement in support of 350 or in support of what we’re trying to do in the legislature.”

SB350 — which requires an 50 percent increase of usage of renewable electricity in the state by the end of 2030 — was signed into law, but it faced tremendous opposition from the oil industry, which successfully lobbied against a petroleum-restriction provision that was ultimately dropped.

“Oil companies have been trying to defeat the bill,” de Leon said. “Targets are the African Americans in the lower house.” 

The oil lobby targeted business-friendly Democrats of all races in the Assembly, according to disclosures and media reports. A de Leon spokesman did not immediately respond to requests for clarification.

However, de Leon did get his wish. At the National Clean Energy Summit on August 25, 2015, Obama praised California’s efforts on SB350. 

“Leaders in California are aiming to generate 50 percent of their electricity from renewables by 2030 — 50 percent,” Obama said. 

In December 2014, prior to Clinton announcing her candidacy, Robby Mook and John Podesta (who would become Clinton’s campaign manager and campaign chairman, respectively) discussed their preference to keep blue stats like California late in the primary process.

Mook had been contacted by another Democratic strategist, Chris Lehane, who served in Bill Clinton’s administration. According to the email, Lehane had called Mook about the California primary after speaking with Podesta, who had given Lehane the impression that he wanted to move the date.

Mook sought clarification, as he believed there was already a strategy in place to keep reliably Democratic states late in the primary process.

“FYI–Lehane called me about CA primary and I told him that the operating strategy is to keep blue states late (i.e. don’t move CA),” Mook wrote to Podesta. “He said he was at dinner with you and was under the impression that you wanted to move it earlier. He’s wondering how to proceed and I said I’d try to get us on the same page and go back with an answer. Are you ok with me saying that we both want CA to stay where it is?”

There was no reply from Podesta in the email dump. But an email from March 2015 — just weeks before Clinton officially announced her candidacy — showed Mook hoping California Senate President Pro Tempore Kevin de Leon would weigh in on the timing of the primary. 

“I met with Cal State Senate President. Super enthusiastic,” Podesta wrote to Mook in an email with the Los Angeles Democrat’s name in the subject line. “Do anything including travel to other states. Also volunteered to line up other state senators.”

“Fantastic,” Mook exclaimed. “Did he mention moving the primary date at all?”

A spokesman for de Leon did not immediately return requests for comment. Clinton’s campaign did not immediately respond as well.

Complaints of a rigged process

This election cycle has been rife with complaints and conspiracy theories that the Democratic nomination process was skewed toward Clinton.

Former Maryland Governor Martin O’Malley complained the Democratic National Committee scheduled the debates to favor Clinton. Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders had his own concerns. 

Indeed, the complaints of a rigged process from the public and Clinton’s primary opponents and their supporters — some of the complaints were supported by other Wikileaks dumps — were so great that Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz was ousted from her perch atop the DNC.

No biggie?

As voters know, the date of California’s primary did not change. And Clinton won handily in June, as well as in 2008 against Barack Obama.

According to John J. Pitney, Jr., a Roy P. Crocker professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College, those two facts should quiet concerns of a “rigged” election in a “Clinton-friendly state.”

“Conspiracy-minded Democrats might pounce on the staff chatter, but it’s not the kind of thing that makes a difference to voters,” Pitney said. “The issue might get more traction if there are revelations that states did shift dates in a deliberate effort to help Clinton, or if Clinton herself was involved in the effort.”

Wikileaks’ recent release of a cable from the U.S. ambassador to Tunisia supposedly led to the downfall of that country’s government. The cable actually looks like it could have been written about the government of another state enjoying the blessings of a wonderful seaside Mediterranean climate: California. Revolution next here?

Here’s some of the cable, with the specifically “Tunisian” references cut out:

By JOHN SEILER

The WikiLeaks revelation of U.S. government secrets continues to make front pages and cause controversy. California itself is featured in several Wikileaks releases.

It’s worth pointing out that WikiLeaks’ cables consist of raw intelligence taken directly from government files. They may or may not be not be accurate reports of events. Many are cables sent by government functionaries trying to impress their superiors.

Still, even such information is useful because it tells us what the government itself is writing about people and events.

I’ll report on two categories of Wikileaks: First, those that mention California directly. Second, those concerning global warming, a hot topic in California. I’ll provide links to sites hosting the original documents. You can search for yourself here.

But because of attacks apparently by the U.S. government, some of these sites may be down by the time you read this. “Mirror” sites have been set up, so the data will still be out there if you hunt for it.

Here are the cables, in the chronological order they were sent.

WikiLeaks cables directly dealing with California

1979 Tehran Embassy’s Views of Persians

This odd cable psychoanalyzing Persians is more than 30 years old. It was sent from Tehran by the U.S. Embassy on August 13, 1979,  just before the embassy hostages were seized by the Iranian radicals in the Iran Hostage Crisis, 1979-80, under the title “SUBJECT NEGOTIATIONS” and classified “CONFIDENTIAL.”

¶3. PERHAPS THE SINGLE DOMINANT ASPECT OF THE PERSIAN PSYCHE IS AN OVERRIDING EGOISM. ITS ANTECEDENTS LIE IN THE LONG IRANIAN HISTORY OF INSTABILITY AND INSECURITY WHICH PUT A PREMIUM ON SELF-PRESERVATION. THE PRACTICAL  EFFECT OF IT IS AN ALMOST TOTAL PERSIAN PREOCCUPATION WITH SELF AND LEAVES LITTLE ROOM FOR UNDERSTANDING POINTS OF VIEW OTHER THAN ONE’S OWN.

THUS, FOR EXAMPLE, IT IS INCOMPREHENSIBLE TO AN IRANIAN THAT U.S. IMMIGRATION LAW MAY PROHIBIT ISSUING HIM A TOURIST VISA WHEN HE HAS DETERMINED THAT HE WANTS TO LIVE IN CALIFORNIA.

SIMILARLY, THE IRANIAN CENTRAL BANK SEES NO INCONSISTENCY IN CLAIMING FORCE MAJEURE TO AVOID PENALTIES FOR LATE PAYMENT OF INTEREST DUE ON OUTSTANDING LOANS WHILE THE GOVERNMENT OF WHICH IT IS A PART IS DENYING THE VAILIDITY OF THE VERY GROUNDS UPON WHICH THE CLAIM IS MADE WHEN CONFRONTED BY SIMILAR CLAIMS FROM FOREIGN FIRMS FORCED TO CEASE OPERATIONS DURING THE IRANIAN REVOLUTION.

Ambassador to Brazil discusses California

In a September 9, 2004 cable from Brazil, Ambassador John J. Danilovich explains to President Lula da Silva how America’s election system works. Danilovich is from California. It’s interesting to see how our government explains its elections to a foreign head of state. The cable is from Brasilia and is classified “Confidential”:

¶2. (SBU) On receiving Ambassador Danilovich and a delegation of senior mission officers, Lula welcomed the Ambassador to Brazil and launched immediately into a friendly question and answer session on the status of the U.S. presidential campaign. Ambassador explained the historical function of the conventions, noting that in modern times they have become pro forma “coronations,” but in the past they were actual venues for candidate selection.

Lula mused that Brazil’s party conventions are also pro forma, but last a maximum of a single day. Lula then asked which states would be decisive in terms of votes.

Ambassador discussed the battlefield states and also the general importance of his home state of CALIFORNIA. He invited the president to visit CALIFORNIA, meet with the governor and CALIFORNIA companies with technological, agricultural and commercial interests in Brazil, and address Stanford University.

Actually, in the last three presidential elections (2000, 2004 and 2008), California’s only importance has been to provide massive electoral votes for Democrats. In the 2004 election, President George W. Bush lost the state by 1.2 million votes to John Kerry. Bush hardly campaigned here in 2004, except to troll for donations in Orange County and other Republican areas.

Bulgarian organized crime

A July 7, 2005 cable from Sofia Bulgaria by the Embassy discusses Bulgarian organized crime in California. It’s classified “Confidential” by Ambassador James Pardew and orders: “HOMELAND SECURITY PLEASE PASS TO SECRET SERVICE.” It reports:

¶5. (C) U.S.-based investigations of transnational crime groups have dismantled significant drug trafficking organizations run by Bulgarian nationals in LOS ANGELES and Tampa. These groups imported multi-kilo quantities of cocaine and multi-thousand doses of ecstasy into the United States.

They had drug connections through Amsterdam and some financial backing of an Israeli national. While most members of these groups were convicted and imprisoned in the U.S., three who were charged in California and Florida are still wanted international fugitives who may have returned to Bulgaria to exploit the country’s current policy of not extraditing its citizens.

The three fugitives are IVAYLO ANGELOV PETKOV (Bulgarian citizen born 18 May 1965), IVAN DOBREV (Bulgarian citizen born 25 May 1959), and STEFAN TZVETANOV STOYANOV (Bulgarian citizen born 9 January 1966).

¶6. (SBU) Other investigations in the U.S. have identified Bulgarian nationals manufacturing and selling false identity documents for use in organized bank fraud, mortgage fraud, credit card fraud, and alien smuggling.

Turf war in Baja California

In  November 3, 2008 report from Diplomatic Security Daily and classified “NOFORN” (No Foreign Nationals to see it), the Secretary of State’s office reports on a drug turf battle in Baja California:

¶20. (S//NF) WHA – Mexico – Violence spikes again in Tijuana: According to a mid-level Baja CALIFORNIA state police official, a turf war between the Arellano Felix Organization (AFO) and the Sinaloa Cartel has caused another increase in violence in Tijuana.

The Mexican Government’s counternarcotics efforts — in the form of 3,300 military and police assets patrolling the area under Operation Tijuana — have severely weakened the AFO’s operations. The Sinaloa Cartel, hoping to capitalize on the AFO’s weaknesses, is battling for control of Tijuana’s drug plaza.

While the AFO assassins are skilled, Sinaloa Cartel hit men are poorly trained and have no aversion to public shootings; however, if the Sinaloa Cartel successfully ousts the AFO from Tijuana, DS/TIA/ITA notes the levels of violence should decrease.

While residents and visitors are not being targeted, the likelihood of being in the wrong place at the wrong time is of increasing concern. Cartel targets are being killed during daytime hours in public areas of Tijuana, including restaurants, shopping centers, and near school buildings.

The DoS [Department of State], Travel Alert for Mexico was extended for six months on October 14 to reflect the current and widely reported crime and violence occurring throughout Mexico.

Narco violence trends 2008

Another State Department report on “NARCO VIOLENCE TRENDS IN 2008” was sent on January 23, 2009 from Mexico City. The subject was “The Battle Joined.” It was classified NOFORN (No Foreign Nationals can see it) by Political Minister Counselor Charles V. Barclay, under the title, “Spike in Violence Concentrated at the Border”:

¶3. (C) Violence continued to be concentrated in a few key states, and in 2008 there was a spike in drug-related killings in the northern border territories. An estimated 41 percent of these homicides took place in Chihuahua and Baja CALIFORNIA states and largely in two urban areas, Ciudad Juarez and Tijuana.

Sinaloa continued to rank among the most violent states with approximately 1048 (or 18%) of these killings. The surge in violence along the border stems largely from the intensified struggle among cartels over a few lucrative land crossings to the U.S.

In particular, the January 2008 arrest of cartel leader Alfredo Beltran Leyva sparked a serious rift among the Gulf, Juarez and Sinaloa (Pacific) cartels, which is being played out viciously in Ciudad Juarez.

In Tijuana, rival factions of the weakened Arellano elix Organization, one of which is backed by the Sinaloa cartel, are battling for control….

¶16. (C) While attributing last year’s significant spike in violence to its own successes marks an effort by the Calderon administration to put the best face possible on a grim situation, there is also considerable truth to the assertion.

President Calderon’s counter-narcotics team has scored significant successes, particularly in the last 12 months. Record numbers of weapons and drugs have been seized, key members of drug cartels have been arrested and/or extradited, cartel sources inside government institutions have been arrested ) including a former Deputy Attorney General and the head of Interpol in Mexico.

The GOM has disrupted cartel operations in meaningful ways; in year-end reports SEDENA and SEMAR reported that together they have reduced the maritime trafficking of illicit drugs by 65 percent and cut direct air transit of illegal drugs from Colombia by 90 percent.

According to collaborative sensitive reporting, the January 2008 arrest of Alfredo Beltran Leyva split the Pacific Cartel, and accentuated antagonism between that DTO and the

Gulf organization which caused the spike in violence in Chihuahua, Sinaloa, and Baja CALIFORNIA. In addition to these rifts, frustrated traffickers have turned to kidnappings and extortion to compensate for the loss in drug-trafficking revenue, expanding their reach and impacting a greater number of bystanders who have no involvement in DTO activities. These kinds of impacts bring home to ordinary Mexicans the nature of the struggle here.

Global Warming and AB32

AB32 is officially called the  Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. It mandates that greenhouse gas emissions — which supposedly cause a dangerous increase in earth temperatures — in California must be reduced by 25 percent by 2020. Just a month ago, on Nov. 2, California voters roundly rejected  Proposition 23, which would have suspended AB 32 to save jobs.

Essential to the defeat of Prop. 23 was the belief that human-caused global warming has occurred, and is continuing. Yet, reported the Dec. 8 New York Times, in the state of Georgia, “Temperatures are running 15 to 20 degrees below normal, and forecasters predict a particularly cold winter in the Southeast.” And on Nov. 29, BoilerJuice.com reported “record low temperatures were recorded on Saturday (Nov. 27th) night, as thermometers read -18 degrees C in some parts of the UK.”

Now, here’s the Guardian’s summary of what WikiLeaks revealed about the U.S. government’s manipulations to advance belief in global warming:

Hidden behind the save-the-world rhetoric of the global climate change negotiations lies the mucky realpolitik: money and threats buy political support; spying and cyberwarfare are used to seek out leverage.

The US diplomatic cables reveal how the US seeks dirt on nations opposed to its approach to tackling global warming; how financial and other aid is used by countries to gain political backing; how distrust, broken promises and creative accounting dog negotiations; and how the US mounted a secret global diplomatic offensive to overwhelm opposition to the controversial “Copenhagen accord“, the unofficial document that emerged from the ruins of the Copenhagen climate change summit in 2009.

Negotiating a climate treaty is a high-stakes game, not just because of the danger warming poses to civilisation but also because re-engineering the global economy to a low-carbon model will see the flow of billions of dollars redirected.

Another Guardian article reports:

In the cable requesting intelligence from UN diplomats, it names specific countries of interest, including China, France, Japan, Mexico, Russia and the European Union, and seeks biographical details of individuals such as credit card and frequent-flyer numbers. It also seeks compromising intelligence on the officials running the climate negotiations, such as “efforts by treaty secretariats to influence treaty negotiations or compliance”.

Despite pushing the accord hard, America’s deputy climate change envoy, Jonathan Pershing, revealed some concerns about it in the meeting with the EU climate action commissioner, Connie Hedegaard. The cable notes Pershing saying the national action plans to cut emissions submitted “by some major economies were ‘opaque'”. Hedegaard agrees – “China’s submission was open to interpretation” and Pershing says “Brazil’s and India’s submissions were as well”….

If China is, with the US, the biggest player in the climate change negotiations, then Saudi Arabia is the most difficult, being the only country to openly doubt the reality of human-caused climate change.

The US engages heavily, with the most revealing information coming from a cable with the subject line: “Two faces of Saudi Arabia’s climate negotiating position”. It analyses ways to gain Saudi support for the accord, as well as the mixed messages coming from the kingdom.

The US ambassador, James Smith, says in the cable: “Saudi officials have suggested that they need to find a way to climb down gracefully from the country’s tough negotiating position. More sustained engagement in co-ordination with other governments, particularly if pitched as an effort to develop partnership, may help them do so.” On a practical level, he notes: “Saudi officials are very eager to obtain investment credits for carbon capture and storage (CCS) and other technology transfer projects.”

The WikiLeaks data dump occurred after the Nov. 2 election. But it’s interesting to speculate what would have happened if the cables had been dumped in the summer of 2010, giving the pro-Prop. 23 forces a treasure trove of information to use in favor of their proposition, and against AB 32.

Questions about California

The WikiLeaks cables all concern American diplomacy with foreign countries. Yet WikiLeaks promises many more releases of information it holds. This raises some questions:

Did the federal government also interfere in California’s election by working to defeat Prop. 23?

Does WikiLeaks have anything from the California state government? Are there internal communications among Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, his staff, state legislators, legislative staff and others, concerning AB 32, global warming, Prop. 23, and other issues?

If WikiLeaks has those documents and releases them, what will they reveal?

Are state officials as cynical and manipulative as U.S. officials?

Are there people in state government who can release important documents so the public can know what is going on in “their” government?

As WikiLeaks dumps more documents, I’ll check them for California references and post what I find on CalWatchdog.com.

John Seiler is a reporter and analyst for CalWatchdog.com. His email: writejohnseiler@gmail.com.

]]> https://calwatchdog.com/2010/12/16/wikileaks-and-california/feed/ 2 11707