Newly revealed documents show the Democratic National Committee struggled last year over how to respond to a top general’s homophobic comments.
A flurry of e-mails sent the day after Marine Gen. Peter Pace called gay sex “immoral” in March 2007 shows DNC staff couldn’t quickly decide how to handle the situation.
Discussion that began at 11:34 a.m. March 13 lasted several hours before the DNC issued a statement at 4:06 p.m. that noted Pace had “no business condemning the noble service and sacrifices made by our gay and lesbian soldiers.”
In the hours before the statement was released, DNC staff debated who should be quoted and what should be said.
“Personally, I’m concerned that we’ll create too many problems if [DNC Chair Howard] Dean condemns the sitting Chairman of the Joint Chiefs during a time of war,” wrote Damien LaVera, a DNC spokesperson.
Leah Daughtry, the DNC’s chief of staff, asked in one message, “What are the pros and cons of issuing a statement?” Karen Finney, the DNC’s communications director, responded with a message saying, “We will get hit from LGBT if we don’t do something.”
LaVera at one point noted that Daughtry only wanted “to issue a statement from me to reporters who ask for it.” But Brian Bond, executive director of the DNC’s Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council, asked in response, “Then what is the point of a statement?”
According to a message sent by LaVera, Daughtry eventually “signed off” on a statement for limited distribution. But the rebuttal did not please all.
“This was our response?” wrote Parag Mehta, the DNC’s director of training. “I love you all, but this is lame. I can’t believe that today, a Republican Senator from Virginia showed up the DNC when it came to standing up for gay Americans!”
Sen. John Warner (R-Va.) said the same day that he “respectfully, but strongly” disagreed with Pace’s view “that homosexuality is immoral.”
To stop what it calls an “abuse of the discovery process,” the Democratic National Committee is seeking new safeguards as it fights a gay man’s discrimination lawsuit.
Motions filed in D.C. Superior Court last week aim to halt document leaks stemming from the lawsuit. The leaks are described in court filings as “embarrassing, oppressing and damaging” to the DNC and Rev. Leah Daughtry, its chief of staff.
DNC attorneys also note in the Jan. 30 filings that much of the leaked material has “nothing whatsoever” to do with the case filed last year by Donald Hitchcock.
“In this case, the only conceivable reasons for Mr. Hitchcock’s dissemination of discovery materials to the press are to damage the DNC financially and otherwise in the LGBT community and to damage Rev. Daughtry’s reputation,” says the filing. “Therefore, good cause exists to enter a protective order restricting public dissemination of discovery materials.”
If granted by Judge Jeanette Clark, the protective order would “prohibit public dissemination” of subpoenaed documents and deposition testimony. It would not seal the case.
But the request drew strong objections this week from Hitchcock’s attorneys.
“The DNC’s motion for a ‘limited’ protective order is actually seeking a complete gag order that would improperly prohibit any public disclosure about this litigation, and flies in the face of First Amendment protection,” said Lynne Bernabei, who represents Hitchcock.
“The alleged harm of which the DNC complains — the disclosure of non-confidential information about the defendants’ own discriminatory conduct — was self-inflicted and a problem of their own making. The DNC has failed to establish good cause for entering a gag order.”
Hitchcock’s lawsuit, filed in April 2007, says he was the target of discrimination, retaliation and defamation during and after his tenure as director of the Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council.
Hitchcock, who joined the DNC in June 2005, was fired in May 2006. The move came days after Hitchcock’s domestic partner, Paul Yandura, a longtime party activist, sent an open letter to gay Democrats criticizing DNC Chair Howard Dean and suggesting that gays should temporarily withhold donations to the Democratic Party.
The lawsuit names as defendants the DNC; Dean; Julie Tagen, the DNC’s deputy finance director; and Andy Tobias, DNC treasurer. Tobias is the DNC’s highest-ranking openly gay official.
Joe Sandler, the DNC’s general counsel, has said the charges “have no merit” and that the DNC is “committed to defending its position vigorously in court.”
Separately, Stacie Paxton, the DNC’s press secretary, this week chided Hitchcock and Yandura.
“While most Democrats are focused on keeping anti-LGBT Republicans like Mitt Romney and John McCain out of the White House, the plaintiffs in this case are more concerned about their campaign of inappropriately leaking court materials for the sole purpose of damaging the reputation and privacy of people who aren’t even parties to the case,” she said. “We have consistently refrained from commenting on this matter, and have asked the court to put an end to false and misleading smear campaign by granting a limited protective order.”
In a statement to the Blade, Paxton also noted the steps DNC officials have taken to incorporate and prioritize gay issues.
“While their case is crumbling and these personal attacks seem to be all the plaintiffs have left, the truth is the DNC’s commitment to combating the Republican Party’s anti-gay attacks is clear,” she said. “We are proud to have invested unprecedented resources in combating anti-gay ballot measures in a half dozen states, adopted new delegate selection rules that will expand LGBT participation in the convention to historic levels, appointed a record number of LGBT leaders to the standing committees of the convention, and pursued a 50-state strategy that helped elect Democrats who stood up for the LGBT community in states like Iowa, Colorado, Ohio, New Hampshire, Oregon and Indiana.”
In response, Bernabei said case documents show the DNC repeatedly resisted “taking action in favor of the LGBT community.”
She said the DNC refused, at least through the first half of 2006, to fund efforts to combat state ballot initiatives that sought to ban same-sex marriage.
She also said the DNC delayed adding gender identity to its anti-discrimination policy and fumbled a response to former Marine Gen. Peter Pace’s homophobic comments in March 2007.
“We realize that the DNC and its representatives are not used to being held accountable and that they want nothing more desperately than to change the subject while wasting resources to avoid facing the truth,” she said.
“This is a case about the DNC’s discrimination against the LGBT community and Mr. Hitchcock as a gay man. The DNC still does not get it. The DNC has not afforded the LGBT community the respect afforded to other DNC constituencies.”
It was not known when Clark would rule on the DNC’s requested protective order.
E-mail author revealed
In their filings last week, DNC attorneys also identified the author of e-mails that denounced Daughtry in 2006 for allegedly inciting anti-gay prejudice.
John Marble, a spokesperson for the gay partisan group National Stonewall Democrats, told Brian Bond, Hitchcock’s successor at the DNC, in e-mails sent in August 2006 that Daughtry and other DNC officials should be “confronted for their bigotry and fired.”
Referring to Daughtry, Marble wrote, “I think Samuel L. Jackson said it best when he said ‘I’m sick of these mother fuckin’ snakes on this mother fuckin’ plane.’ It may be time to drive the snakes from the DNC.”
Marble’s name was redacted on copies of the e-mails that were obtained by the Blade last month. DNC attorneys made public in their filings unedited copies of the e-mails.
When contacted this week by the Blade, Marble said that he and Stonewall have apologized for the messages. He declined further comment.
The DNC’s request for new safeguards in the case came the same week that the deposition transcript of a third DNC official surfaced.
Spokesperson Damien LaVera said a leaked e-mail written by Tagen that notes she uses the Blade and other gay newspapers for “the bottom of the birdcage” strained the working relationship.
“And do you line your birdcage with the Blade?” asks Bernabei.
“I don’t have a birdcage,” LaVera replies. “But I don’t see why Democrats should be opposed to recycling.”
When asked about Hitchcock’s firing, LaVera says he was never given an official explanation, but was left with the impression that Hitchcock “wasn’t getting the job done.”
LaVera notes that the DNC “spent zero” dollars during Hitchcock’s tenure to combat state ballot initiatives that sought to ban same-sex marriage, and that changed after Bond arrived.
“I know, for example, that $5,000 went to Illinois,” LaVera says in the transcript. “I think $5,000 went to Wisconsin. I don’t have a complete list beyond that.”
Bernabei, however, said this week that the DNC has produced no documents about the “alleged performance deficiencies” that led to Hitchcock’s firing.
“Tellingly,” she said, “there is not one document produced in discovery that will prove that Donald Hitchcock was fired for any reason other than discrimination and retaliation based on his sexual orientation.”
In another case development, the judge ruled Feb. 1 that a prominent lesbian activist was properly subpoenaed despite confusion over her home address.
It was unclear, though, whether the ruling would require longtime Democratic Party volunteer Claire Lucas to sit for deposition in the case. Alan Kabat, an attorney for Hitchcock, said the order “means that Ms. Lucas must show up for her deposition, which will likely take place later this month.”
But Barry Reingold, who represents Lucas, said the judge “did not order Ms. Lucas to appear for a deposition on or by any specific date.”
The
following comments were posted by our readers and were
not edited by the Washington Blade. We ask that you
treat others with respect; any post deemed offensive will
be removed.
