Yesterday intrepid reporter Kerry Eleveld reported that today there would be a super secret meeting between the White House and gay rights organizations over the repeal of DADT.
Today Eleveld obtained a White House email to gay organizations participating in today’s meeting from the White House liaison to the gay community, and gay traitor Brian Bond, in which he outright threatened that if any of them dare mention the DADT court cases – the ones the Obama administration keeps defending and appealing, even though they don’t have to – the White House will immediately end the meeting.
The Advocate has obtained a copy of an email sent from Brian Bond, deputy director of the White House Office of Public Engagement and the de facto LGBT liaison, to the meeting’s participants, who include: Allison Herwitt and Joe Solmonese of the Human Rights Campaign; Shane Larson of the Stonewall Democrats; Winnie Stachelberg of the Center for American Progress; Aubrey Sarvis of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network; R. Clarke Cooper of the Log Cabin Republicans; Alex Nicholson and Jarrod Chlapowski of Servicemembers United; Nathaniel Frank, DADT expert formerly of the Palm Center; Jim Kessler of[White House gay liaison Brian] Bond writes [in his email to the groups]:
“Obviously this meeting has gotten out. We are expecting the content of the conversation today to be off the record and to help us figure out how to move forward with the lame duck session.
Also as previously mentioned, there can be no discussion of current court cases or legal strategy or Counsel’s Office will end the meeting. The focus is repeal and the lame duck session. This is also a non-partisan meeting where we want everyone’s help.”
By the look at the groups and people invited. (Hi Joe! Did you bring your kneepads?) It sounds like the actual goal of the meeting its meant to get gay leaders to get on Obama’s page forget about the Court Cases and appeals and move on with them. . Its not meant to help gays, its meant to keep gay peoples anger distracted and have these groups lead us down the primrose path again. If it weren’t why will there be no open dialogue about the DADT court cases.