Wikileaks and the Podesta emails: Two things

posted by
November 3, 2016
William Lloyd Garrison Center for Libertarian Advocacy Journalism
by Thomas L Knapp  
Posted in Commentary, PND Commentary

"As final voting in the 2016 US presidential election approaches, questions continue to swirl around Wikileaks and its release of an email archive copied from the personal files of John Podesta, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's campaign chair. It would be impossible, in the space of a single column, to fully consider the content and implications of those emails. There are, however, two relevant questions which those interested in the matter should carefully consider. First, are the emails authentic and unaltered? ... Secondly, is the Podesta email hack an attempt by Vladimir Putin to affect the election?" (11/03/16)

http://thegarrisoncenter.org/archives/8257  

Tags: , , , , ,

  • dL

    There is only one relevant question, (i) are the documents authentic

    yes, Wikileaks has reputation for reliability and authenticity: 100%.

    (ii) the source of the leaks is not important

    Nonetheless, I think the discussion of point (ii) should be clarified a bit in terms of differentiating between “leaking a hack” and committing a hack. The joint DNI/DHS statement read:

    “The recent DISCLOSURES of alleged hacked e-mails on sites like DCLeaks.com and WikiLeaks and by the Guccifer 2.0 online persona are consistent with the methods and motivations of Russian-directed efforts.”

    Now, hacking the DNC would be consistent with Russian spycraft. Of course, it would be consistent with spycraft in general. Indeed, I would speculate Russian intel, Chinese Intel, Israeli intel and American intel all likely penetrated the DNC(and this would be nothing new).

    However, LEAKING(disclosing) the hack to a leaks platform like Wikileaks would not be consistent w/ state spycraft…Russian or otherwise.

Our Sponsors