1. All this talk about opposition research tonight is driving me nuts because so many people are getting it wrong (not Kyle). This is an area I know well, I got my training as a oppo researcher many years ago, I have also commissioned, disseminated, and received a ton of research https://twitter.com/kyletblaine/status/1093322100088152065

2. First, let's stop calling it opposition research. Real researchers don't call it that...so let's stop talking about it like we're in the movies. Second, let me clarify what research is and isn't. Again, this isn't the movies.

3. Research for political campaigns, political action committees, independent expenditure committees is about publicly available information. Now you may wonder, if its publicly available why campaigns have to pay people good money for publicly available info.

4. Putting together publicly available information is not only arduous and exhausting, you would be surprised by how much people miss because they don't know how and where to look for information. Now, what qualifies as publicly available information?

5. Court records, voter registration records, if the candidate is a legislator, their voting record, transcripts of committee hearings, ethics records, every single news clip about them, every video they've ever appeared in from small Democratic Party BBQs to..(cont)

6. Speeches at women's groups to videos from supporters (or haters) on the sidelines of parades. Real estate and tax records. If they own a business or ran a business: employment records, regulatory records (OSHA stuff), licensing records). This is a very short list of examples

7. So here's what research isn't...it's not about gossip, it's not about stuff that sources tell you, and as a researcher, you're not flying to some remote town to talk to people unless it's to talk to the city clerk about divorce records that aren't digitized.

8. So how does research get commissioned? Here's an example. A candidate is running for Senator, they're already an officeholder (let's say state senator). First, they'll commission a self-research packet (which often means several large binders/pdfs). In that packet...

9. They'll find every public statement (of note) they've ever made, donors or fundraisers that may cause issues for them (if they're smart they would vett donors before they take $$), everything re their voting record, videos - all the stuff I talked about earlier in the thread.

10. Then when they launch their campaign, a smart manager/general consultant won't have full research books done on every candidate. A book will only be done on one or two candidates at most normally but the manager will request top line hits on some other candidates

11. Top line hits mean that the researcher can put stuff together in a couple days usually and involve any tax liens, lawsuits, controversial videos/statements, bad business stuff etc.

12. Now, what researchers do that's so critical is they know, they have a sense of what matters in campaigns. They don't just plop all the information in a binder, they organize it in a way that prioritizes the information. They also, often, construct a narrative

13. So at the start of a book (if the researcher is good) you'll find basic information on the candidate, everything from DOB to addresses, marriages, children, social media accounts. Then you'll find a timeline of their life. From birth to present day. Timeline is critical

14. Because it allows the campaign team to understand where they may find more information OR (and this is where I talk about reporters)..its where they can guide reporters. So, for example, a press person can tell a reporter "hey, Joe Smith lived in North Dakota for a year.."

15. That may peak the reporters interest, that information may not have been easily available. The reporter may wonder why someone who spent their entire life in Southern California randomly lived in North Dakota for a year. Maybe there's something there?

16. Research books those two big sections are organized in sections after that (ex. voting record, real estate records etc). There are normally a few subsections on each page, a title for that subsection and then normally a paragraph of info under that section. Example...

17. "Joe Smith Accepted $300,000 in donations from Oil Companies" - then the paragraph may include something like this "including $25,000 from Alan Jones who was fined by the EPA 120 separate times." All of this is publicly available.

18. Another section may start with something like this "Joe Smith, When He Was A City Council Member, Repeatedly Prevented The Council From Settling With A Sexual Harassment Victim." Again, old records but public records. These are all great "hits" on a candidate

19. There's so much more and the thing that researchers get really good at is learning what will really make an impact. Think the oil company donations will make a difference? Probably not. What will make a difference? That Joe Smith had 20 unpaid parking tickets.

20. May sound silly to some but that's the kind of thing that pisses of voters and makes them wonder about that candidates ability to handle simple stuff. So here's a little something about researchers..

21. Researchers are not shadowy figures who look like PIs in movies. They're nerdy, they look more like someone you'd find at the Genius Bar at Apple than an FBI. Field Office. Researchers are obsessive and odd. Soo many of the researchers I know are obsessed with unusual things

22. Several researchers I know are obsessed with learning languages like Greek and Latin. They get true joy from finding stuff no one else did. They're not driven by destroying someone but by uncovering the truth..no matter who it is about or where it is.

23. Ok so you have your research book...do you just hand it over to reporters? NO! I have never known anyone to ever do this..ever! Oppo dump is a ridiculous term. Most of the time, 99% of the research stays with the campaign. The candidate uses it to beef up on their opponent

24. The research is used for social media posts, debates (a big one), tv, digital, and radio ads, and for stump speeches. What is passed onto reporters? Really really big stuff. So if a researcher finds a really incriminating video on Youtube or some bad real estate records

25. The campaign will pass that stuff onto the reporter. This happens in several ways, sometimes they'll just give reporters records, other times they'll say "look into X", sometimes if its a complicated issue they'll sit down with the reporter and walk them through it. (cont)

26. What isn't done, again, is a reporter getting a pile of research thrown on their desk ("oppo dump") and they figure it out. Campaigns don't do this because they want to keep reporters focused on their narrative (good reporters aren't going to be guided by that, but..)

27. From the campaign perspective, you don't just dump stuff. Campaigns also try to carefully time the sharing of any research with reporters closer to Election Day...the October surprise is a real thing...Now, let's talk about a story that came out tonight

28. This story by @aterkel @mtredden about Amy Klobuchar's workplace conduct. So many people tweeted "oppo dump!" which is wrong. It wasn't and here's why, nothing that's in the story was publicly available. All based on sourcing https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/amy-klobuchar-abuse-staff-2020_us_5c5a1cb1e4b0871047588649

29. Now this may have been from research if, for example, the reporting was based on ethics records that never got any attention. But most of the time stories like that come from reporters digging around, not researchers handing them stuff. Trust me, would make things easier!

30. So this story was about @aterkel @mtredden knowing about Klobuchar's reputation (which many people knew about) and calling around to sources to beef up the story, to back it up. That doesn't come from researchers. Researchers aren't private investigators.

31. I could go on all night but I just wanted to clear something up about who researchers are, what they do, and how they do it. It's truly above board work, it's not dark and nefarious.

32. And please don't attack reporters by accusing them of colluding with campaigns, when/if we do get tips with research we have to do 95 percent of the work to confirm and run down a story.