![\"U.S.](\"http:\/\/nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com\/2016\/10\/gettyimages-129077122.jpg?quality=80&w=970\" "\\"Rigged")
<\/div>\nHillary Clinton embraces campaign chair John Podesta on\u00a0October 12, 2011 in Washington, DC. Chip Somodevila\/Getty Images)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n On October 12, WikiLeaks<\/a> released part four and five of Clinton<\/a> campaign Chair John Podesta\u2019s emails<\/a>, with part six to be released on October 13, and part seven to follow on October 14.<\/p>\n \u201cAs soon as the nomination is wrapped up, I will be your biggest surrogate,\u201d current Interim Chair of the Democratic National Committee (DNC) Donna Brazile, wrote to Podesta in a January 2016 email<\/a>. As a Vice Chair of the DNC, Brazile was bound to neutrality per the charter, but as shown in several emails released so far, that was not the case.<\/p>\n \u201cI pushed back hard on this, and Axe. So weird to attack the kids the night before the first primary,\u201d Brazile wrote in an email<\/a>\u00a0she forwarded to Podesta about what CNN was doing while she served as a CNN contributor.<\/p>\n On October 10, an email was released that showed Brazile tipping off the Clinton<\/a>campaign to an outreach campaign being conducted by the Sanders campaign. Brazile defended herself on Twitter claiming she also sent the Sanders<\/a> campaign \u201cadvice,\u201d but did not release or cite any examples.<\/p>\n On October 11, Mediaite\u2019s Jordan Chariton first reported<\/a> another email that showed Brazile tipping off the Clinton<\/a> campaign to a question on the death penalty that would be asked at a CNN Town Hall the next day. Brazile was a CNN contributor at the time, and that wasn\u2019t her only helpful tip. \u201cFor the debate team,\u201d she wrote in a March email<\/a> about the Voting Rights Act, forwarded to Podesta.<\/p>\n In 2013, during an interview<\/a> with ABC News, Brazile said, \u201cif Clinton<\/a> gets in the race, there will be a coronation of her,\u201d foreshadowing that she\u00a0and the rest of theDNC<\/a> and Democratic Party<\/a>\u00a0would line up behind Hillary Clinton<\/a> as the nominee before a single person voted in the Democratic primaries.<\/p>\n In a March 2016 email<\/a>, Mark Alan Siegel, a former New York State Assemblyman andDemocratic<\/a>\u00a0official, advised the Clinton <\/a>campaign staff to offer Bernie Sanders<\/a> and his supporters a reduction in future super delegates to pacify them. \u201cSo if we \u2018give\u2019 Bernie this in the Convention\u2019s rules committee, his people will think they\u2019ve \u2018won\u2019 something from the Party Establishment,\u201d he wrote. \u201cAnd it functionally doesn\u2019t make any difference anyway. They win. We don\u2019t lose. Everyone is happy.\u201d<\/p>\n Neera Tanden, president of the Center for American Progress which publishes\u00a0Think Progress<\/i>, wrote in a January 2016 email<\/a>, \u201cBut I should say that I would do whateverHillary<\/a> needs always. I owe her a lot. And I\u2019m a loyal soldier.\u201d<\/p>\n An April 2015 email<\/a> describes the Clinton<\/a> campaign and DNC coordinating to rig the debate schedule for Clinton\u2019s<\/a> benefit. The debate schedule was a commonly cited criticism against then-DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz<\/a>, who resigned after the WikiLeaks release of DNC<\/a> emails in July showed her overt favoritism for Clinton all through the primaries.<\/p>\n \u201cThrough internal discussions, we concluded that it was in our interest to: 1) limit the number of debates (and the number in each state); 2) start the debates as late as possible; 3) keep debates out of the busy window between February 1 and February 27, 2016 (Iowa to South Carolina)\u201d read the email from Charlie Baker, a senior advisor to the Clinton<\/a> campaign from the Dewey Square Group. \u201cThe other campaigns have advocated (not surprisingly) for more debates and for the schedule to start significantly earlier.\u201d<\/p>\n An email<\/a> from November 2014 shows Clinton<\/a> campaign staff backing a law that would push the Illinois primary from March to April or May, with their reasoning being that the state could potentially serve as a lifeline to moderate Republicans as it did for Mitt Romney in 2012. \u201cThe Clintons won\u2019t forget what their friends have done for them. It would be helpful to feel out what path, if any, we have to get them to yes. This will probably take some pushing,\u201d wrote Clinton<\/a>\u00a0Campaign Manager Robby Mook to Podesta. The primary<\/a> wound up not being moved, with Trump winning Illinois, but the push was strategic as Clinton didn\u2019t poll well against moderate Republicans such as Sen. Marco Rubio and Gov. John Kasich.<\/p>\n In\u00a0damage control over a false statement Clinton made about Nancy Reagan\u2019s role in the HIV\/AIDS epidemic, the Clinton campaign noted in an email chain<\/a>\u00a0that they would have to coerce Clinton into admitting she was wrong. \u201cHere is a revised draft of a statement. It does include the words \u2018I made a mistake\u2019 in the first line. We need a strategy for getting her to approve this.\u201d<\/p>\n And then there\u2019s the overly docile press, who were so eager to help Clinton get elected. In one email chain<\/a>\u00a0discussing the upcoming release of exchanges between Clinton and writer Sidney Blumenthal, insiders noted that the Associated Press appeared to be willing to\u00a0allow the Clinton campaign to plant favorable stories. \u201c[T]hey are considering placing a story with a friendly at the AP (Matt Lee or Bradley Klapper), that would lay this out before the majority on the committee has a chance to realize what they have and distort it,\u201d wrote Nick Merrill, the Clinton campaign\u2019s traveling press secretary.<\/p>\n \u201cShe is going to read me the story later today off the record to further assure me,\u201d Clinton campaign Communications Director Jennifer Palmieri wrote in an email<\/a> to Podesta and other staff about New York Times<\/em>\u2018 Maggie Haberman coordinating directly with the campaign to provide Clinton with favorable coverage.<\/p>\n In March 2015, an email<\/a> from Clinton <\/a>campaign manager assistant Marissa Astor provides some options for when a story in the AP will be published, with a statement from Clinton and Q&A regarding her private email server, in addition to an option to \u201cpre-negotiate\u201d a TV interview.<\/p>\n An April 2015 email<\/a> from Clinton<\/a> staff issued a press policy that says, \u201cLess than 100 people \u2013 NO cell phones, NO press.\u201d According to the email, events with over 100 people, cell phones are allowed, \u201cand ONE print pooler will be escorted in for her remarks only and then escorted out. NO tv cameras. Over 500 people in a public space \u2013 YES cell phones, OPEN press (all press access including tv cameras). At fundraisers in private homes NO tv cameras no matter the size. ONE print pooler only.\u201d According to the email, Hillary Clinton approved the policy. \u201cHuma spoke to HRC and she agreed with this plan,\u201d wrote Kristina Schake, the Clinton campaign deputy communications director.<\/p>\n In a January 2015 email<\/a>, in response to an inquiry as to whether the Clinton <\/a>staff have any diversity they can point to, political consultant Jim Margolis jokes, \u201cRobby claims he\u2019s 1\/16th Apache, so we should be all set.\u201d<\/p>\n Part four, five, six, and seven brings the total\u00a0WikiLeaks<\/a>\u00a0release of Podesta emails to around 10,000 out of about 50,000.<\/p>\n