Cleta Mitchell-McClatchy Email Correspondence

[ MARCH 14, 2018]

COMMUNICATIONS FROM/TO PETER STONE ON WEDNESDAY MARCH 14, 2018
READ FROM BOTTOM. THIS IS THE FIRST KNOWLEDGE THAT I HAD BEEN
INCLUDED IN THE ADAM SCHIFF REPORT

To: Peter Stone
From: Cleta Mitchell Wed 3/14/2018 1:47 PM
Re: background today as early as possible with McClatchy
Well, that’s at least something that they didn’t leak it. But if talking to me is something they
think is even of interest, it just underscores that they are grasping at straws. They have nothing.
There is nothing.
Cleta Mitchell, Esq.
Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 14, 2018, at 1:37 PM, Peter Stone wrote:
Thanks. FYI, the Democrats didn’t leak this document to me and other reporters, but publicly
released a report Tues (which I thought you might have heard of) on various outstanding
questions and areas they wanted to pursue as part of their probe into Russian meddling in the
elections.

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:07 PM, CMitchell wrote:
No. I have no knowledge of anything like this and zero concerns whatsoever about anyone
Russians or otherwise — who “funneled” funds to / through NRA. Anyone who says otherwise
is lying. NRA is meticulous about following all the rules. This is all a complete fabrication.
And it is absolutely outrageous that the Democrats are leaking documents to you and other
reporters. If they want to talk to me, they are wasting everyone’s time and money but I would be
happy to talk to them in order to tell them how offensive and horrible I think they are.
You are welcome to quote me that this is all totally ridiculous.
You guys are all outrageous. Wish all of you would get over your fantasies, get a life and do
something productive and useful. This certainly isn’t.

On Mar 14, 2018, at 12:55 PM, Peter Stone; wrote:
CletaWe’re working on a follow up story to our earlier reporting re the FBI probe into Russian
banker and life time NRA member Alexander Torshin and whether he may have funneled funds
improperly through the NRA or an allied conduit to influence the elections and help Trump win.
I’ve seen your name on a short list of people that the minority on House Intel wants to talk
with;who might shed light on the NRA’s relationship with Alexander Torshin; I also have heard
from a source I trust that you have expressed concerns to some investigators or people familiar
with the probes about the NRA’s links to Russia and whether Russian funds could have flowed
improperly through the NRA or allied conduits (such as LLCs or c4s) to influence the elections.
Is this basically correct, or can you explain whether you have any concerns about the propriety of
Torshin’s dealings with the NRA, and if he or other Russians might have sent funds via the NRA
or conduits that may be illegal?

I’d like as much on the record as possible but if you need to comment some on background that’s
okay. We are trying to do a short piece today so hope you can reply in the next few hours.
If you’d prefer to go over this on the phone and clarify some points on background or off the
record that’s possible. Thanks, Peter

On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:53 AM, Peter Stone wrote:
fyi

From: CMitchell
Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 11:50 AM
Subject: Re: background today as early as possible with McClatchy
To: Peter Stone

I’m traveling in Florida and can’t really talk today. If you want to send me what you’re talking
about, that references me, I’m happy to review and get back to you next couple of days. I
actually have no idea what you are talking about so pls send whatever you wish me to discuss.
Thx


On Mar 14, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Peter Stone wrote:
Hi CletaI’m working on a short piece today that deals with the Congressional probes into
Russian meddling in the 2016 elections and saw your name on the House Intel document that
was released yesterday and have heard other details from sources about your concerns. Can you
talk briefly on background today pre or post lunch? thanks Peter.

[MARCH 16, 2018]

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 9:29 AM

From: Cleta Mitchell
To: Peter Stone
Subject: NRA lawyer expressed concerns about groups Russia ties, investigators told |

McClatchy Washington Bureau

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politicsgovernment/congress/article205412394.html
Peter. Either you get this headline changed or don’t ever ever ever call me again. This is a
COMPLETE lie and don’t tell me the old “I don’t write the headlines”. You go tell your editor
that this is a lie and you obviously didn’t write your lead paragraph correctly. This is FAKE
NEWS and you need to fix it.
You better do that.
Such lies. Such liars. All of you. It is disgraceful.

Sent from my iPhone

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 9:35 AM

To: Peter Stone
Subject: NRA lawyer expressed concerns about group’s Russia ties, investigators told |


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politicsgovernment/congress/article205412394.html
I am rereading the lead paragraph and you COMPLETELY lied in that paragraph. You took
some unnamed source, you put their false statement as the lead and you put my truthful on the
record statement down in the story as some sort of denial.
You are reprehensible. Your tactics are disgusting.
Who is your editor? I want this corrected. NOW!!!

CletaJust letting you know that we discussed your concerns and are changing the headline at
the top of the home page, tweaking the first sentence, and moving up your denial from the 4th
graf to the 3rd. Peter

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 10:13 AM, Peter Stone wrote:
CletaWe’re discussing your concerns now with our editor and will get back to you shortly.
Peter

On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Peter Stone wrote:
fyi
Sent from my iPhone

From: CMitchell
Date: Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 11:05 AM
Subject: NRA lawyer expressed concerns about group’s Russia ties, investigators told |
To: Peter Stone

Why not the first paragraph? Why not say that I told you there is nothing to this and the House
Dems are full of crap to even list me? And how about that I haven’t been involved with NRA
since 2011? This is not a story. The only story is the false narrative from the House Dems that
you are perpetuating.
What’s the new headline?
I’m not “denying”. I’m telling you there is no there here. Period. It is a completely false
narrative. That better be the upshot of this revised story. That I never ever expressed any
concerns whatsoever because I never had any. Ever.
Sent from my iPhone

CletaJust letting you know that we discussed your concerns and are changing the headline at
the top of the home page, tweaking the first sentence, and moving up your denial from the 4th
graf to the 3rd. Peter

TO: ggordon
Subject: Correction Demanded

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 9:40 AM

I do not know you. I told Peter Stone that this entire reference to Russia and the NRA is a lie and
I have ZERO knowledge about it and ZERO concerns about it. I told him it was preposterous.
Then you run a story saying the OPPOSITE? You better fix this story. This is an outright lie.
Total fake news.
Who is your editor? I’ve NEVER said or even had a thought like this — I’ve always said the
NRA is meticulous about its money and using correct dollars for its expenditures. And anyone
who says anything to the contrary is lying. I told Peter Stone that.
Yet you run a story with unnamed sources saying otherwise and attribute some concerns to me? I
can’t believe this.
I want this corrected. Immediately. Take that headline and that paragraph out. I went on the
record.
Your “sources” did not.
Where are your journalistic scruples? Where? Where? This is outrageous beyond words.
Fix it. Now.
Sent from my iPhone

On Mar 16, 2018, at 12:59 PM, Gordon, Greg wrote:
Hi Cleta,
I did get your message, but Peter is taking the lead on this. I do believe that I phoned you a few
decades ago (I’ve been reporting in Washington for 40 years).
I’d love to know how your name has surfaced in connection with the NRA multiple times in
these inquiries, and yet you say that you have had no connections to the group since 2011.
There’s a disconnect somewhere, and I’m happy to hear any explanation you may have. Are you
saying that you’ve never done outside legal work for the NRA in the last few years? Did you
represent Paul Erickson or his LLC? Other NRA allies?
We don’t make this stuff up, and I trust that you know that.
Best,
Greg Gordon
National Correspondent
McClatchy Newspapers Washington Bureau

TO: ggordon

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 2:59 PM

You made this one up. I know that. You published a 100% false story. That’s what I know.
I have had zero involvement with the NRA since my board term expired in 2012.
The reason my name surfaces with regard to the NRA is that every time there’s a school
shooting, and the media feeding frenzy that always follows, reporters I know call and ask me
things. I usually am willing to talk to them on the record just providing some context as to the
organization.
This particular rumor is completely false. I’ve never thought for one second that the NRA took
Russian money in 2016 or any other time. If someone told me that, I would require proof as I do
not believe that. It would be completely out of character and one thing the NRA is is consistent.
I have not done legal work for the NRA in more than a decade.
I’ve never represented Paul Erickson. He was retained by a client of mine a number of years
ago probably 10 or 11 years ago — to do some work for the organization but that was short
lived.
As for representing NRA allies, I would say 99% of my clients are NRA allies who believe in the
2d Amendment.
So you guys have been fed a totally false story and notwithstanding that I told Peter that in no
uncertain terms on Wednesday, you nevertheless ran with the unnamed sources who lied to you
and your story said the opposite of the truth. The exact opposite.
Not too impressive. Fake news. Totally false. Very bad work. Worst I’ve seen in years.
Maybe ever since there’s not even a kernel of truth in the assertion.
Makes me even more aware of what a lying bunch the Adam Schiff and his staff are, to
perpetuate something like this. Totally irresponsible. All of you.
Sent from my iPhone

Thanks for your reply. We will explore further. Of course, it’s possible that the congressional
Democrats on the intel committees manufactured this stuff, but that has not been their record
over the last 15 months, at least from my experience.
We pride ourselves on getting our stories right, and we use anonymous sources with great
caution. That is why Peter went over this with his sources for days. And of course, your name
was on the House list. Do you have any idea why that might have occurred? Could you have
expressed something in an email or in a phone call?
You have stated that you have done no legal work for the NRA in a decade. Have you done
consulting, advisory or any other kind of work for the organization, and if so, during what time
span? Have you been involved in meeting or hosting members of Right to Bear arms, the
Russian gun rights group?
I don’t know you, either, Cleta, but I can assure you that we had no agenda in reporting this story
and are merely searching for the truth.
Thanks, Greg

TO: ggordon

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 3:49 PM

Well, Greg your search for the truth didn’t come close to finding it. Not even close. The
answers to ALL your questions below: no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.
All no.
And I have never ever ever said or even thought of any Russia NRA connection. First I ever
heard about that was when reporters started calling me, asking me I knew anything about it. And
I started laughing. It is preposterous.
Your source is a lying sack of you know what.
But here’s the REALLY laughable statement: “Of course, it’s possible that the congressional
Democrats on the intel committees manufactured this stuff, but that has not been their record
over the last 15 months, at least from my experience.”
That is a bizarre statement. As I said earlier, to you and to Peter, I now see first hand the sick
relationship between the media and Adam Schiff. You guys believe everything they say because
you WANT to. For liberals, believing is seeing. Facts and truth do not matter. To the media or
to Adam Schiff et al. Lies upon lies upon lies.
I don’t care how many times you ask me. I don’t care how you frame the questions. I have not
had any relationship with the NRA in six years. I had zero contact with NRA in 2016. Or for
almost the five years before that.
And anyone who says otherwise is LYING.
And you took the unnamed source, wrote a false lead paragraph which lead to a 100% false
headline.
And buried the truth down in the story.
Very impressive.

Sent from my iPhone

Okay. We are taking your responses seriously. And please don’t brand me a liberal who takes
everything that Democrats throw my way at face value. I wrote plenty of stories about Hillary’s
emails, the Clinton Foundation and other stories that Democrats hated. A close relative of mine
belongs to the NRA (or did; not sure if his membership is current). So it seems clear that you’re
willing to make false assumptions about me at the same time you’re accusing me and my
colleagues of disregard for the truth. Why didn’t you bring up your disassociation with the NRA
when Peter contacted you yesterday? Wasn’t that a rather important fact?
I am not seeking to raise the temperature here, Cleta. You don’t need any help in that endeavor.
But I am trying to get to the bottom of this.
Greg

TO: ggordon

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 4:29 PM

I wonder why I assume that the working press is liberal. Wonder why I think that. If the shoe
does not fit, then I apologize. I just have been watching the Schiff show for more than a year and
I haven’t see[n] much objectivity in the coverage of his antics. Not much objectivity at all. He’s
held up as some sort of icon, and Devin Nune[s] is ridiculed. I happen to see things very
differently than your media entity has reported this entire story. I find it very disturbing that you
guys have joined forces with Schiff against Nune[s]. And I think that perhaps that willingness to
believe the Schiff team is why your story today got it so wrong. The pattern of the reporting is
bent toward believing these fake stories that support Schiff’s view of the world.
I told Peter that there was not a shred of truth to the story. I could not have been more emphatic.
I do not lie to journalists. I would not have said it was false if it wasn’t. I would have tried to
explain it. I did not do that. I said it is not true.
Getting to the bottom of this means asking what else the HSCI Dems have told you or written or
said to you that is also false. Getting to the bottom of this is asking whether you’ve been fair
and objective to Devin Nune[s] and his staff — or whether perhaps you’ve taken everything he
says with a bucket of salt while accepting as true whatever the Schiff forces say.
This story is totally false so I have every reason to believe that much of the rest of what they
have said and written is false. Totally unreliable.
Peter knows I don’t have any NRA association any longer. I’ve told him that before. He’s
called me over a number of years about NRA. I have told him as I tell every reporter that I am
no longer on the board and haven’t been for several years. I’m willing to go on the record with
reporters to defend the organization of which I am a lifetime member and to explain how it
works, because the organization is always lied about and attacked every time there’s a school
shooting. I may rethink doing that after this experience. Someone has fabricated this story and
pushed it to the Committee and to reporters. And you guys fell for it and disregarded what I
said.
I have had the same response to everyone who has approached me about this rumor, which is that
it is a crock. I couldn’t have been more emphatic. Other reporters accepted the truth. And
dropped it. But told me someone was peddling it to them. But they realized it could not be and
was not true.
Somehow, that wasn’t good enough for McClatchey and for some unknown reason, you ran a
story citing an unnamed source who apparently knows more about me than I do. That’s what’s
so mystifying.
But if you want to really get to the bottom of this, you should get out all your stories about the
HSCI investigation, you should go sit down with Nune[s] and his staff and you should ask them
to go through the stories and point out any falsehoods in the stories. Think about that.
I’m betting it would be instructive for everyone.
I’m also betting they have given up trying to get a fair shake. Maybe I’m wrong. But an after
action review might be in order here.
Sent from my iPhone

but our sources say the committees still have questions about reports that you were concerned
over the NRA and Russia.

TO: ggordon

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 5:42 PM

“...but our sources say the committees still have questions about reports that you were concerned
over the NRA and Russia.”
I have NEVER had a millisecond of concern about the NRA and Russia. Your “sources” are
liars. And the
Committees’ staff — the Dems — are also relying on these same liars if the Committees “still
have questions”. I can answer their questions in four words.
It. Is. Not. True.
Your “credible” attorney source is an idiot and needs to get his/her facts straight. I haven’t
represented the NRA as an attorney in at least a decade. So that’s even more of a lie. I can’t even
remember the last time I performed legal services for the NRA. It was well before I left the
board. Years earlier.
This discussion just makes it worse. The entire Russia collusion narrative is a Potemkin Village,
perpetrated by the Democrats to undermine the Trump election, and promoted by the liberal
media who share the Democrats’ antipathy toward Trump and toward those of us who voted for
and still support him. What Hillary said last week in India just reflects the general thinking of the
left, which is the reason why the country has been subjected to the whole fake Russia collusion
story, and why these “sources” and Democrats on the Committees just can’t let it go. They
cannot and will not admit it is all a hoax. A hoax THEY perpetrated.
Did the Russians try to influence the election? Yes. And what they REALLY have done is push
the left’s buttons since the election through supporting and pushing the antiTrump resistance
movement. Just as the former Soviet Union funded the nuclear freeze movement in the US in the
1970’s and 80’s.
But there was no Trump collusion in the election. And what the Russians attempted didn’t affect
the outcome one iota. That’s what Schiff & Co. can’t accept. That’s why they desperately throw a
bunch of names into a report. Like mine. You should investigate what other false stories are in
Schiff’s report.
Mine can’t be the only one.

Sent from my iPhone

We’ve tweaked the story, Cleta. You assuredly won’t like it, but we are trying to describe your
relationship correctly.
Again, I very much appreciate the dialogue. I once had dinner with friends of ours and the NRA
treasurer was among the group. It’s important for the media to hear from the NRA, which usually
doesn’t talk to us much, and its supporters.
Greg

TO: ggordon

Sent: Fri 3/16/2018 8:14 PM
That is exactly why I’ve always been willing to speak with reporters on the record about the
NRA. Since I left the board, I’m free to do that. But after this experience with McClatchey,
I’m likely to stop that practice. This whole episode, totally fabricated, has given me reason to
believe I’ve been too open and too helpful. So I doubt I will ever speak again to a reporter about
the NRA. This has taught me a valuable lesson about the media and I’m having to rethink my
practice of generally being willing to speak with any reporter about any topic. I think the world
has changed and it is no longer a good idea for conservatives to just speak openly with
journalists. The lines have been drawn and I am only now realizing that.
The fact that, notwithstanding everything I’ve told Peter and you over the past 48 hours, that you
don’t just retract the entire story as baseless and apologize for the earlier versions, and that you
guys are still trying to salvage lies from anonymous sources, tells me that I can no longer trust
that honesty will prevail. I literally have never experienced anything like this. A story without
an ounce of truth being disseminated as factual is shocking. Shocking.
No more conversations with journalists about the NRA. Ever. And I’m going to be very much
more guarded about all dealings with reporters on everything from this point forward. Seems as
though I have no choice.

[MARCH 17, 2018]

To: Greg Gordon, Peter Stone
Sent: Sat 3/17/2018 9:23 AM
Subject: FW: Google Alert “Cleta Mitchell”
See what your lies caused? Now, the media herd repeats as true something that NEVER EVER
happened. This is why people hate the media.
Here are some questions for your “source”:
1. Where did I supposedly express these concerns?
2. To whom?
3. Who all was present?
4. What month?
5. Did your source hear it personally?
6. What were the circumstances?
7. Do I know this person?
You get me some details and I promise I can demonstrate the lies you’ve been told and are
spreading.
This is 100% false. Yet, here it is repeated everywhere.
And you guys are not even the National Enquirer. Although it is impossible to discern any
difference.
Some journalistic ethics.

Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Google Alerts
Date: March 17, 2018 at 9:09:13 AM EDT
To: cmitchell

[MARCH 18, 2018]

Emails from/to G Gordon and Peter Stone, Sunday March 18, 2018

On Mar 18, 2018, at 9:53 AM, Greg Gordon wrote:

I’m afraid that I just got your later messages, Cleta. We initially described the timing and
connection of your relationship with NRA inaccurately and corrected it. You did not mention
your disassociation with the NRA to Peter on Thursday, and when we fully understood it, we
fixed it and changed the headline. I don’t understand why you are sending me scathing messages
about a story that ACCURATELY describes what congressional investigators are looking into.
Your denials are prominently and amply included in the story. It was a House report that first lit
up your name for the public. I am sorry that you feel aggrieved, Cleta, but as a longtime
Washington attorney, you well know how this works. Now you are just shooting the messenger.
Greg

To: Ggordon, Peter Stone
On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 11:11 AM, CMitchell wrote:
I only shoot messengers who lie. McClatchey is lying about me and about the NRA. It is
actionable. It needs to be FIXED.
Peter never asked me about my current association with the NRA. In fact, he really only asked
me about the report and I told him it was a flat out lie. One would think he might have stopped
and asked more questions. He didn’t. Because in my experience, Peter always has his story /
narrative in mind before he ever talks to me. I’ve been dealing with him for years and his bias is
so complete that he turns a deaf ear when I disagree with whatever his current narrative happens
to be. I’ve had that experience with him for years. He only did what he always does. He
checked the box of communicating with me so he could say he had done that and then proceeded
to completely disregard that I told him it was not true. Shouldn’t he have started asking more
questions at that point? Yes. But he did not. You did not. You guys didn’t even stop and say
maybe something was amiss. He just went back and asked his same lying source if the story was
true and went right ahead and that was the lead, that was and is the headline and that story is still
there on your site. Still publishing a lie.
Your story and headline are both still false. FALSE. I NEVER expressed such concerns or
thoughts because I never HAD such concerns or thoughts.

I want to get on a call with you, Peter and your editor tomorrow. I want a complete retraction
and apology. Because there is not one shred of truth to your story, as I’ve told you and Peter
about a dozen times now. But it is still on your website despite what I’ve written exhaustively.
You are listening to a lying unnamed source and you have not asked ANY of the questions I
listed to you yesterday. The questions that a good reporter would already ask and then come to
me and ask those same questions.
If you do not correct this story and headline by retracting and apologizing to me and to the NRA,
I swear I’m going to sue you and go on a discrediting rampage against McClatchey, you and
Peter by name.
I don’t know WHY you guys think there is anything credible about your story and your source. I
now understand how it works with Schiff and McClatchey. It’s a symbiotic relationship of
spreading false stories.
When can we do a call tomorrow? I’m serious. This needs to be corrected and all you’ve done
so far is tweak the edges while continuing to cling to the false narrative.
I NEVER had a single thought expressed or unexpressed about the NRA and Russian
involvement. As I have told you multiple times, the first I heard of this was from some reporters
asking me about it. I started laughing. It is completely implausible. Why can’t you accept that
you, your story are WRONG??? The other reporters asked me enough questions to realize the
story they had been Fed was false. So they didn’t go further. Peter didn’t do that. He never
does. But your name is on the story as well.
I want to talk to you guys with your editor tomorrow. I’m entitled to do that since you have
smeared me and you are still smearing me by refusing to remove the story.
I want to know if you’re going to fix this properly. And I want to speak to your editor. There are
at least a dozen questions Peter and you should be asking your “source”. I have spoken to the
other reporters who first called me about this. That same source was peddling the story to them.
But after I spoke to them, they realized it was false and did not pursue it further. I’m quite
certain that same source got this into the Dems report. But you didn’t and still don’t just cite to
the false Dems report. You still are saying as fact that I had knowledge and concerns about
Russian money funneled to NRA. That is a lie. A lie. It is not true. Not a shred of truth.
Please arrange a call. Let me know who your editor is and the phone number. McClatchey
needs to make this right. Today.


Hi Cleta,

Our editor is out of pocket today, but will ring you first thing tomorrow morning.

Greg

To: Ggordon

Sent: Sunday, March 18, 2018 1:30 pm
Thank you. Call me at [omitted]. I think all of us need to be on the call. Because there are
questions that need to be asked regarding this reporting. And I don’t want to go through a useless
exercise where he’s just defending your false story.

I want to know the answers to the questions I posed yesterday regarding the underlying “facts”
that caused you to decide that someone who will not let you use his/her name somehow knows
more about what I know / said / did than I do.

I want to know if you’ve even asked your source those questions

Where did I supposedly express these “concerns”?

When? Year? Month?

What was the context?

This is all a total lie and I want to know why you are so convinced that this happened? What is
so persuasive to you that you won’t even consider for a moment that it isn’t true?

What makes this source so credible to you, other than a preconceived bias against the NRA and
against me?

There are serious questions that I deserve answers to and the opportunity to respond. Clearly,
telling you over and over that it is false is having no effect.

Have you asked these questions? And what are the responses?

I spoke to NO ONE during 2016 about the NRA and what it was or was not doing in the election.
So how is it possible that your anonymous source tells you otherwise and that’s enough for you?

Give me more “facts” that you’ve gotten from your anonymous source. Surely you have them.
Surely.

What are they?

Cleta Mitchell-McClatchy Email Correspondence

Cargado por

Información del documento

Título original

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Cleta Mitchell-McClatchy Email Correspondence

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

[ MARCH 14, 2018]

También podría gustarte