Former Hillary Clinton adviser Philippe Reines had some particularly pointed exchanges with the Washington press corps on his personal and State email accounts, according to a trove of new emails from March and April of 2010 obtained and released by Gawker.

The email chains include 72 pages with Reines' conversations with reporters, which Gawker got their hands on after suing the State Department earlier this year, contending the agency did not provide correspondence of the aide's interactions with the media.

Story Continued Below

The exchanges, which include current and former POLITICO employees, were on two different email addresses, at his State address—reinesp@state.gov—and at a "preines" private email account with a domain name that is redacted in most, but not all, instances.

As Gawker noted, the State Department did not properly redact part of one of the numerous exchanges between Reines and The New York Times' Mark Leibovich, which showed the preines address to be preines@gmail.com.

Gawker contends that the use of a private email address interfered with the State Department's ability to respond to Freedom of Information Act requests. Reines, who is now a managing director at Beacon Global Strategies, could not immediately be reached for comment. An automatic email reply directed queries to the Clinton campaign, which directed queries to Reines' attorney Beth Wilkinson.

"First, nothing Philippe did or didn't do interfered with FOIA. That is a State Deparment process and they would need to explain why this took three years. And when the Department of State begins to release his actual .gov email you will clearly see the shift from his personal to work," Wilkinson wrote in an email to POLITICO. "Second, read these email. They are about dinner tickets, fires in office buildings. The only thing they prove is that Gawker has a troubling obsession with Philippe."

The exchanges also show the frequent and casual exchanges between Reines and Leibovich. In an email chain from March 16, 2010, Leibovich shared a link to an in-jest POLITICO blog post from reporter Glenn Thrush about a power outage at a congressional office building. "There is nothing too absurd for them to write about," Reines responded, to which Leibovich said, "Now I have to match it."

In another exchange with Leibovich, Reines appeared to ask the Times reporter if he could work in a negative reference to POLITICO reporter Ben Smith (now BuzzFeed's editor in chief), asking him if he could "in passing note that Smith has taken 'an unusual interest in hitting' Reines."

"I’m just doing a really fast, punchy ticktock of the episode," Leibovich responded.

The conversation stemmed from a POLITICO Playbook item from Mike Allen, whom Leibovich was in the middle of profiling for a New York Times Magazine piece. The line in Playbook asked for brunch conversations on why the media is not talking about Hillary Clinton as a potential Supreme Court nominee.

Leibovich asked Reines to comment on the item.

In response, Reines emailed Leibovich a four-point answer from what appears to be his State address (the address is not visible in the document) before forwarding it again with his State.gov email and then once more with his Gmail account.

The response itself included Reines telling Laura Rozen, then a foreign-policy reporter for POLITICO, that the chances of Clinton being a Supreme Court nominee are "[l]ess than none" and that "[s]omething being a sexy media story shouldn't be confused with truth."

In his forwarded response from his Gmail account, Reines said that "it seems like this is a bridge to me going on the record - but really need you to set it up the right way."

Leibovich's response: "Yep...I did get it...thanks. ...if you want to say something on the record, I would use in the context of this little episode, of course... although, to be honest, I'm way over length to begin with so it might be hard to squeeze in...thnx"

"I don't want to force a square peg into a round hole so unless you think it has value, I'll let you do the talking," Reines wrote in response, adding, "Though was looking forward to calling them toilet stall graffiti."

When asked about the emails and his relationship with Reines, Leibovich said in an email to POLITICO, "I guess all I'd say is that I've known Phillippe a long time, my dealings with him have been generally good and that was a long time ago...I'll leave it to others to locate any news value in those e-mails..."

In another, involving POLITICO's Glenn Thrush, Reines challenged the reporter to take a polygraph test to determine which of their sources is lying about a story that he was asking Clinton backers to ice a potential Caroline Kennedy candidacy for her open New York Senate seat, cc'ing POLITICO co-founders Jim VandeHei, John Harris and chief White House correspondent Mike Allen.

"You have nothing to lose here. At worst, you scratch one more source off your credibility list. Only they have something to lose. Or if I’m lying, I have a ton to lose. You can use a barrel of ink to burn me for making a stink and then lying about it," Reines wrote in another email, cc'ing the same three at POLITICO.

Other email chains are simple interview requests, from personalities like Fox News' Greta Susteren and John Roberts, as well as correspondence related to Van Susteren's invitation of Reines to the White House Correspondents' Dinner.

Reines and then-ABC News White House correspondent Jake Tapper had some tense exchanges in the emails as well.

Tapper wrote Reines on March 10, 2010, asking him why he would rather have NBC News' Andrea Mitchell do an interview with Clinton than with him on "This Week." Clinton was also interviewed by CNN's Jill Dougherty.

In response, Reines said to "set the you part aside," that no one from the show had reached out, and then proceeded to tell Tapper why he would have made the decision if someone from ABC had. The interviews, he wrote, were eight questions, 10 minutes each and that Tapper would have "wanted twice as long and spent half as much time on the topic we were pushing." He gave additional reasons as well, including the fact that the White House did not have any additional points to push out with Clinton on the Sunday show and that he is a White House reporter "who has no real interest in State."

Tapper said he understood on all but two points, the first being that one of the reasons Bill Clinton was doing "This Week" the next month was "because they thought I was one of the only reporters fair to HRC during the primaries." The other point, that he "has no real interest," he said, was not true. Noting that Martha Raddatz had the international affairs beat and that he posted blog posts from then-State Department reporter Kirit Radia on his White House blog, Tapper said he had "huge interest."

Reines then offered Tapper an exclusive interview with the secretary if he joined them during their next overseas trip.

A little more than a month later, Tapper emailed Reines after Clinton was booked on NBC's "Meet the Press" for May 2.

"So I guess all is forgiven if a network is completely unfair and sexist in its campaign coverage as long as they’re willing to buy new furniture," he wrote. (NBC's Sunday show switched to a new set on the day Clinton appeared to coincide with its first broadcast in high definition.)

After a back and forth, Reines wrote, "When you get new chairs, I’m sure the WH will send a cabinet member too."

Tapper's response: "Just reminding you that some of us were fair to Madam Secretary."

Tapper did not immediately provide a comment.