It is not often that I recommend an article from Mother Jones, the lefty stalwart.

But Daniel Schulman of Mother Jones has done an excellent piece on the latest Clinton email dump.

Schulman concentrates on the Clinton State Department's media manipulation. No, it's not exactly a surprise that government officials try to manipulate the press–or that Democrats quite often excell at this. Still, Schulman has done a fine job of extracting new nuggets from the emails and presenting them in a highly readable way. He writes:

Much of this email traffic involved Philippe Reines, a senior advisor and spokesman for Clinton known for his combative exchanges with the press. One email thread that underscored the Clinton team's focus on message-control came in late May 2009, ahead of a meeting of the Organization of American States. Its member-nations span North and South America and were poised to vote on whether to revoke Cuba's decades-long suspension from OAS.

"If we set the expectation now that the outcome is likely to not go our way, ANY alternative – even one kicking the can down the road…- would be seen as a significant victory," Reines emailed Clinton, who was planning to attend part of the OAS session in Honduras.

"How will we set any expectations?" Clinton replied. "Did anyone background the press yet?"

Reines responded that "in terms of setting expectations it would be a combo of a few overt and not overt things." And he noted, "There's one blogger that folks loosely follow, I know how to get her something through a 3rd party."

Not surprisingly, image was all important to the once and future presidential candidate. When CNN reported that the OAS had voted to revoke Clinton's suspension in 2009, Clinton was concerned that CNN was reporting that this was being "done against my wishes." And asked, "Any way to salvage?" Reines emailed back that the situation was "not as dire as it seems" and said that they had to "weather the night." Reins emailed that…

we are suffering from two significant tactical problems: 1) you are here and removed 2) our press corps was out of position today and in flight, so the people we worked on all week and the ones likely to skew our way were replaced by reporters not connected to us. The two issues above will be rectified tomorrow in your two interviews – especially Greta who is malleable. We can use that to make a strong case on the principle, and the simple fact Cuba wasn't in the OAS yesterday, and won't be tomorrow. Everyday that passes reinforces that point. The time difference to East Coast will help us in moving whatever is said in these interviews tomorrow.

One of the most irevealing emails came from Lynn Forester de Rothschild, a Clinton backer who remained loyal to Clinton long after it was clear that then-candidate Barack Obama was going to get the nomination. She wrote about encountering former New York Times journalist and Council of Foreign Affairs honcho on Nantucket:

H,
I spent yesterday with Les Gelb on Nantucket. He had lots to say which might be of interest, but I thought the most important thing to tell you is to make sure you are aware of the Parade magazine piece he wants to do about you. He would like to do a day in your life, when you meet with members of Congress and international figures. He wants to show the impact you are having domestically and internationally. He said he would give you a veto over content and looked me in the eye and said, "she will like it". Maybe you know this, but did not want it to fall between the cracks. Enjoy your vacation and love to all of you.
Xoxo,
L

The bolding is mine.

The nation's supposedly busy top diplomat found time to "create a day" for Gelb and his Parade magazine profile:

Clinton responded, "We should create a day–meeting w Webb about Burma, McCain/Lieberman/Graham about Af-Pak, etc. Meeting w Mitchell/Holbrooke etc." (She was referring to Jim Webb, John McCain, Joseph Lieberman, Lindsey Graham, George Mitchell, and Richard Holbrooke.)

Gelb did indeed get his day-in-life-with-Hillary piece, which ran in Parade on October 25, 2009. 

Golly, I guess we shouldn't be surprised that Hillary sometimes has a hard time coming up with achievements during her tenure at State. I commend Mr. Schulman, who must have incredible patience to have gone through these emails. That he would do this perhaps signals that Hillary's support on the far left should give her cause for concern.

The New York Times also reported a juicy tidbit: Seems that CNN commentator and former Bill Clinton adviser Paul Begala actually asked the State Department to provide talking points for a CNN segment on Clinton! The Week quoted this (from the New York Times):

Mr. Begala [asked] for talking points before he went on CNN to rate Mrs. Clinton's early performance. Ms. Marshall referred him to several State Department aides. After his appearance, Mr. Begala emailed back:

"I gave Sec. Clinton an A+ in our dopey CNN report card last night." Ms. Mills forwarded that to Mrs. Clinton with an "FYI."

Ever wonder why some Democratic commentators sound like they are using administration talking points? Well, some of them are!

It is a foregone conclusion that the mainstream media, which did so much to elevate Barack Obama to the White House, will provide similar assistance to Mrs. Clinton.

This Mother Jones article is required reading for Republicans seeking the highest office.