Email communications from individuals associated with the Trump campaign have been hacked by malign actors within the last ten days, Popular Information has confirmed.
This is superb and responsible journalism, Judd, and I applaud your ethical approach. After months and years of journalistic sleaze by U.S. media, it is time for the organizations to step up and explain their choices.
Having been the victim of the Podesta hacks, you have some standing to make a different decision. I will trust you when you say there is no news that could impact the election in the e-mails you received.
But NY Times and Washington Post continue to justify their attacks on Hillary Clinton (her e-mails!), which you note were hardly a scandal, even while they stoutly refuse to publish Trump's e-mails.
And their reporting during this campaign is heavily tilted to Trump. They downplay all the successes of the Biden administration, or ignore them entirely, while they dutifully sane wash Trump's demented rally ravings.
They harried Biden out of running for being old, picking over every stuttering stumble as if it proved the country is in deep danger if Biden remains President, while covering Trump's racist dog whistles as if they are serious news, or no news at all.
Their hypocrisy is glaring. It is infuriating to watch the man get propped up while the woman was torn apart. With no apologies and zero introspection by the 4th Estate.
This is why it really makes me wonder if this is the Pentagon Papers level. What exactly are they hiding? You haven't seen all the e-mails, remember.
The 4th Estate lost the trust of the people by protecting and placing Trump on a podium, extending his power. Their track record, unlike yours, has been covering up for this man, over and over, through the past decade. They are a large part of his rise and return to run again for President a second time.
So why should we trust them to decide what we see and what we don't prior to the vote?
Amen! You express completely my view of the msm, which is why I do not subscribe to the major newspapers, nor watch network news. It’s no wonder that people are undecided when they do not receive clear, unbiased news and news analyses. One needs time, energy and a reliable internet connection to carefully sift information/ mis- and dis-information
and the outlets that report it.
Of course, it doesn’t take any work to recognize trump as a danger to our country and the world.
In answer to your last sentence, "Two wrongs don't make a right." While IMO the NYT and WaPo are unworthy of our trust they earned it long before the current thefts took place.
Never forget what Dr. Ellsberg recommended several years ago. He wrote that Mr. Snowden should turn his information over to The Guardian, Uk, specifically stating that he should not give it to the NYT.
If WaPo, NYT, Politico, and other publications can't be transparent about why a very different decision was reached, how are we supposed to trust them? Reading here about your choice not to publish is the first time I feel it's a complete and truthful answer. I don't know if they are covering up that they were so easily had by Trump and Russia, and they are embarrassed, or if the owners of these publications wanted to sway an election. How do I give them credit for growth, if I don't know that is what is happening here? Was the choice simply greed? Is the choice now because they are fearful of economic blowback from conservatives, or worse getting dragged into the House for a hearing, or maybe they are afraid of MAGA terrorists swatting them? Is it fear of repercussions, is it learning not to fall for manipulation from outside actors, or do they just prefer Trump and want him to win? Every day they are silent they are losing credibility and the public trust.
I'm pretty sure they just want Trump to win, given the headline writing of the NYT newsletters that have been arriving in my email despite my attempts to unsubscribe.
While I distinguish your analysis from NYT and WAPO, I think you are disappointingly presumptuous in denying your readers (and others) the fair opportunity to assess the materials. Wikileaks, NYT and WAPO became enablers of the orange dildo in 2016. Your analysis as well as their lacking analysis - once again - enables this threat to our democratic existence.
How has the last 15 years of “the public” deciding what is news and sharing it on social media platforms been positive for our public discourse? The whole point about editorial judgement is having a professional that doesn’t jump when someone screams “squirrel” like us amateurs. Yes we have to trust this someone. I trust Judd.
We could go back more than 15 years to buttress your point. Some of the public make poor choices ( or less than discerning choices) about what is “news” - whatever that means. My problem with “professional journalism” is that they give us general statements and sound bites. Judd gave his reasons for not disclosing the information - which was much more than NYT or WAPO - but the “deep six” of this material denies critical thinking by others. What is lingering is the concern that there is something hidden that needs to be made public - and that NYT and WAPO are hiding the information. Both of those institutions have lost credibility (IMHO) over this issue and the incredible amount of reporting about Joe Biden’s age (but not the orange one). Judd stepped into this losing quicksand pit, which is most unfortunate. Hence3 my original statement of being disappointed.
1) what could there possibly be in these dossiers and emails that would change a voters mind more than the thousands of scandals we already know about? All of these people are known to the public, so many of their scandals public, what more could there possibly be that the public needs to take an....analytical(??) crack at? We are talking about The Public that can hardly be assed to read past the headlines most days?
2) Why is it Mr Legums job to put his personal safety expressly at risk so we can all be nosy? We are talking about the MAGA cult here. The Vances, Millers, and Rubio's of this world will waste no time putting a target on Mr Legums head if he is the sole leaker of information.
3) going back to The Public and your assertion that they/we have a "right" to decide for ourselves if these leaks are newsworthy....do you think we'd all do a better job at investigative journalism than...you know ...Judd Legum???
Really - what could there possible be in those dossiers? We are just left to speculate. The public is comprised of more than all those that you seem to disdain.
It is not his job to put his personal safety at risk. He chose to bring up the topic and then throw a towel on it. So - get out of the industry if that is the concern.
No one can assess the value of the material without careful scrutiny. If Judd does not want to release the material and feels it is not newsworthy, then why report that he has this stuff? Just shut up and leave the issue alone. But no - there has to be a statement that he has the material but is not going to release it. I think it would have been better for him to have remained silent on the issue.
So how would you feel if you found out months or years later that he had been contacted about these leaks, determined they weren't newsworthy, and didn't write this substack? Would you be writing something like "I can't believe he didn't tell us he had this information and sat on it!" ?
It sounds like you are just upset that you've been told something exists that you can't have.
I don't have "disdain" for the public, I have a reasonable skepticism that they will "analyze" this email hack any better than they "analyzed" the email hacks of 2016.
Also, for the record, Judd has expressily stated that he believes it would be illegal/unethical for him to release this information because he knows it was obtained illegally. So your assertion is that your need for this information trumps his literal potential status as a free man?
Print and TV news thought for sure HRC was winning. So they were extra harsh scrutinizing her and her campaign’s every move. So they could pretend to be courageous and impartial. This time around, they are hedging in case of a Trump win, so he might not threaten their business. Bosses at these outfits need to reassess why they are in the news business in the first place or just quit.
I bet Vanity Fair would do a story with Robert's material.
Judd, submit this article as an editorial to the NY Times et al. Perhaps they will come down from their high horse and show some humility and common sense. I love the Wapo and the NYT but this is an outrage. The world would be a different place if they had had scruples around the wikileaks, and if Comey had gone by the book and kept his mouth shut about an ongoing investigation.
I'm sure I'm wrong but I feel that comey is most responsible for President Hillary's loss and for thursting drumfp on good Americans and should feel guilty for the loss of lives due to reckless, inhumane, & cruel negligence of drumfp and his enablers as well as for disastrous economic consequences, and huge, untenable national debt.
These republicans actually (comer, barr, even mueller on some level) used the law &/or precedence to help the most undeserving, corrupt criminal sqat in WH.
Don't they say in politics and love everything's a fair game?
It's very apparent from decades of Democrats "going high when the rethugs go low/er/est" now to the abyss, has not at all helped, and actually helped gqp to demolish the rights of everyone unlike them.
Seemed like when Joe saw it clearly when he became President Biden!
Sorry, but I don't see why we on the left need to be hampered by the rules that gqp, the otconman has been trampling for decades.
I want to commend you for the position you take regarding stolen communications. It is eye opening with regard to the sanctity of digital communications but for some reason people continue to believe that their digital words , images , etc. are totally private. My advice is don’t write anywhere if you can say it face to face and don’t do that if you can nod.
Your thorough explanation of the facts and your analysis is most welcome. Perhaps the editors at the higher profile publications made a similar thorough analysis, but if so it would have been much wiser to inform their readers as you have done here. We’re fully capable of understanding.
As a retired reporter and journalist, I admire your restrain. The double standard of the mainstream media is stunning. I believe they fear opening themselves up to attack from MAGA and helping Trump play the victim.
I wish I could share your conclusion. I suspect the reason is that the major shareholders of MSM are supporters of TFG and see his reelection as easy money in more tax cuts, resulting in soaring deficits even as the Right yells about tax and spend liberals.
Thank you, Judd Legum, for being a Prince among journalists. I wrote that I was against our revealing any hacked material recently when you revealed this political espionage by a foreign adversarial group. It felt morally wrong to do their dirty work, so I'm pleased that you agree. And I favor your confrontation of our news organizations that now play this underhanded game with new tactics.
So, Iran thought they could get power from those who do not want Trump and Vance to win. I'm wondering if Russia (its private hackers) will try to play the other side and show their support of their useful idiot, Trump. But, Russia's public posture is that they want Harris to win. Although we know that is not true, they don't want to give away that lie to the gullible.
There's no question about what Russia is doing. It's somewhat camouflaged by their use of American idiots like Tucker Carlson, but their involvement is clear.
Only Democrats play by the rules and exercise restraint. The asymmetric Republican advantage is that they brazenly change and event flaunt the rules to gain advantage. They have a very long history of doing so in voter suppression. Democrats are fighting this election with one hand tied behind our backs and I am deeply disappointed that the leading main stream media outlets aid and abet the Republican dirty tricks campaign.
This is superb and responsible journalism, Judd, and I applaud your ethical approach. After months and years of journalistic sleaze by U.S. media, it is time for the organizations to step up and explain their choices.
And in addition to the explanation owed to us all, is an apology to Clinton!
Judd, you are an example. Our country and world need more journalists, and professional in every industry, like you. Thank you.
Having been the victim of the Podesta hacks, you have some standing to make a different decision. I will trust you when you say there is no news that could impact the election in the e-mails you received.
But NY Times and Washington Post continue to justify their attacks on Hillary Clinton (her e-mails!), which you note were hardly a scandal, even while they stoutly refuse to publish Trump's e-mails.
And their reporting during this campaign is heavily tilted to Trump. They downplay all the successes of the Biden administration, or ignore them entirely, while they dutifully sane wash Trump's demented rally ravings.
They harried Biden out of running for being old, picking over every stuttering stumble as if it proved the country is in deep danger if Biden remains President, while covering Trump's racist dog whistles as if they are serious news, or no news at all.
Their hypocrisy is glaring. It is infuriating to watch the man get propped up while the woman was torn apart. With no apologies and zero introspection by the 4th Estate.
This is why it really makes me wonder if this is the Pentagon Papers level. What exactly are they hiding? You haven't seen all the e-mails, remember.
The 4th Estate lost the trust of the people by protecting and placing Trump on a podium, extending his power. Their track record, unlike yours, has been covering up for this man, over and over, through the past decade. They are a large part of his rise and return to run again for President a second time.
So why should we trust them to decide what we see and what we don't prior to the vote?
Amen! You express completely my view of the msm, which is why I do not subscribe to the major newspapers, nor watch network news. It’s no wonder that people are undecided when they do not receive clear, unbiased news and news analyses. One needs time, energy and a reliable internet connection to carefully sift information/ mis- and dis-information
and the outlets that report it.
Of course, it doesn’t take any work to recognize trump as a danger to our country and the world.
https://worldmhc.org/conference/the-more-dangerous-state-of-the-world-and-the-need-for-fit-leadership/
In answer to your last sentence, "Two wrongs don't make a right." While IMO the NYT and WaPo are unworthy of our trust they earned it long before the current thefts took place.
Never forget what Dr. Ellsberg recommended several years ago. He wrote that Mr. Snowden should turn his information over to The Guardian, Uk, specifically stating that he should not give it to the NYT.
If WaPo, NYT, Politico, and other publications can't be transparent about why a very different decision was reached, how are we supposed to trust them? Reading here about your choice not to publish is the first time I feel it's a complete and truthful answer. I don't know if they are covering up that they were so easily had by Trump and Russia, and they are embarrassed, or if the owners of these publications wanted to sway an election. How do I give them credit for growth, if I don't know that is what is happening here? Was the choice simply greed? Is the choice now because they are fearful of economic blowback from conservatives, or worse getting dragged into the House for a hearing, or maybe they are afraid of MAGA terrorists swatting them? Is it fear of repercussions, is it learning not to fall for manipulation from outside actors, or do they just prefer Trump and want him to win? Every day they are silent they are losing credibility and the public trust.
I'm pretty sure they just want Trump to win, given the headline writing of the NYT newsletters that have been arriving in my email despite my attempts to unsubscribe.
The NYT does seem like a lost cause.
Very well framed. Thank you Linda. Thank you Judd.
They lost it all for me several years ago.
While I distinguish your analysis from NYT and WAPO, I think you are disappointingly presumptuous in denying your readers (and others) the fair opportunity to assess the materials. Wikileaks, NYT and WAPO became enablers of the orange dildo in 2016. Your analysis as well as their lacking analysis - once again - enables this threat to our democratic existence.
It's called editorial judgement. Judd has it, the NYT and WAPO don't.
Let the public, not Judd, make that decision.
How has the last 15 years of “the public” deciding what is news and sharing it on social media platforms been positive for our public discourse? The whole point about editorial judgement is having a professional that doesn’t jump when someone screams “squirrel” like us amateurs. Yes we have to trust this someone. I trust Judd.
We could go back more than 15 years to buttress your point. Some of the public make poor choices ( or less than discerning choices) about what is “news” - whatever that means. My problem with “professional journalism” is that they give us general statements and sound bites. Judd gave his reasons for not disclosing the information - which was much more than NYT or WAPO - but the “deep six” of this material denies critical thinking by others. What is lingering is the concern that there is something hidden that needs to be made public - and that NYT and WAPO are hiding the information. Both of those institutions have lost credibility (IMHO) over this issue and the incredible amount of reporting about Joe Biden’s age (but not the orange one). Judd stepped into this losing quicksand pit, which is most unfortunate. Hence3 my original statement of being disappointed.
1) what could there possibly be in these dossiers and emails that would change a voters mind more than the thousands of scandals we already know about? All of these people are known to the public, so many of their scandals public, what more could there possibly be that the public needs to take an....analytical(??) crack at? We are talking about The Public that can hardly be assed to read past the headlines most days?
2) Why is it Mr Legums job to put his personal safety expressly at risk so we can all be nosy? We are talking about the MAGA cult here. The Vances, Millers, and Rubio's of this world will waste no time putting a target on Mr Legums head if he is the sole leaker of information.
3) going back to The Public and your assertion that they/we have a "right" to decide for ourselves if these leaks are newsworthy....do you think we'd all do a better job at investigative journalism than...you know ...Judd Legum???
Really - what could there possible be in those dossiers? We are just left to speculate. The public is comprised of more than all those that you seem to disdain.
It is not his job to put his personal safety at risk. He chose to bring up the topic and then throw a towel on it. So - get out of the industry if that is the concern.
No one can assess the value of the material without careful scrutiny. If Judd does not want to release the material and feels it is not newsworthy, then why report that he has this stuff? Just shut up and leave the issue alone. But no - there has to be a statement that he has the material but is not going to release it. I think it would have been better for him to have remained silent on the issue.
Judd - I find this terribly frustrating.
So how would you feel if you found out months or years later that he had been contacted about these leaks, determined they weren't newsworthy, and didn't write this substack? Would you be writing something like "I can't believe he didn't tell us he had this information and sat on it!" ?
It sounds like you are just upset that you've been told something exists that you can't have.
I don't have "disdain" for the public, I have a reasonable skepticism that they will "analyze" this email hack any better than they "analyzed" the email hacks of 2016.
Also, for the record, Judd has expressily stated that he believes it would be illegal/unethical for him to release this information because he knows it was obtained illegally. So your assertion is that your need for this information trumps his literal potential status as a free man?
Personally, I say release em :V
Respectfully though, I understand your decision.
Print and TV news thought for sure HRC was winning. So they were extra harsh scrutinizing her and her campaign’s every move. So they could pretend to be courageous and impartial. This time around, they are hedging in case of a Trump win, so he might not threaten their business. Bosses at these outfits need to reassess why they are in the news business in the first place or just quit.
I bet Vanity Fair would do a story with Robert's material.
Judd, submit this article as an editorial to the NY Times et al. Perhaps they will come down from their high horse and show some humility and common sense. I love the Wapo and the NYT but this is an outrage. The world would be a different place if they had had scruples around the wikileaks, and if Comey had gone by the book and kept his mouth shut about an ongoing investigation.
You love WaPo and the NYT? Why??
They are quite literally enablers of fascism.
I'm sure I'm wrong but I feel that comey is most responsible for President Hillary's loss and for thursting drumfp on good Americans and should feel guilty for the loss of lives due to reckless, inhumane, & cruel negligence of drumfp and his enablers as well as for disastrous economic consequences, and huge, untenable national debt.
These republicans actually (comer, barr, even mueller on some level) used the law &/or precedence to help the most undeserving, corrupt criminal sqat in WH.
Don't they say in politics and love everything's a fair game?
It's very apparent from decades of Democrats "going high when the rethugs go low/er/est" now to the abyss, has not at all helped, and actually helped gqp to demolish the rights of everyone unlike them.
Seemed like when Joe saw it clearly when he became President Biden!
Sorry, but I don't see why we on the left need to be hampered by the rules that gqp, the otconman has been trampling for decades.
OK, we're talking about WaPo, NYT, and Politico here. Garbage, garbage, and more garbage.
They are what they are, just like Trump.
I want to commend you for the position you take regarding stolen communications. It is eye opening with regard to the sanctity of digital communications but for some reason people continue to believe that their digital words , images , etc. are totally private. My advice is don’t write anywhere if you can say it face to face and don’t do that if you can nod.
Your thorough explanation of the facts and your analysis is most welcome. Perhaps the editors at the higher profile publications made a similar thorough analysis, but if so it would have been much wiser to inform their readers as you have done here. We’re fully capable of understanding.
It seems to me they found the need for thorough analysis 8 years too late. No escaping the bias, the only uncertainty is about why.
As a retired reporter and journalist, I admire your restrain. The double standard of the mainstream media is stunning. I believe they fear opening themselves up to attack from MAGA and helping Trump play the victim.
I wish I could share your conclusion. I suspect the reason is that the major shareholders of MSM are supporters of TFG and see his reelection as easy money in more tax cuts, resulting in soaring deficits even as the Right yells about tax and spend liberals.
Thank you, Judd Legum, for being a Prince among journalists. I wrote that I was against our revealing any hacked material recently when you revealed this political espionage by a foreign adversarial group. It felt morally wrong to do their dirty work, so I'm pleased that you agree. And I favor your confrontation of our news organizations that now play this underhanded game with new tactics.
So, Iran thought they could get power from those who do not want Trump and Vance to win. I'm wondering if Russia (its private hackers) will try to play the other side and show their support of their useful idiot, Trump. But, Russia's public posture is that they want Harris to win. Although we know that is not true, they don't want to give away that lie to the gullible.
There's no question about what Russia is doing. It's somewhat camouflaged by their use of American idiots like Tucker Carlson, but their involvement is clear.
Great reporting!
Only Democrats play by the rules and exercise restraint. The asymmetric Republican advantage is that they brazenly change and event flaunt the rules to gain advantage. They have a very long history of doing so in voter suppression. Democrats are fighting this election with one hand tied behind our backs and I am deeply disappointed that the leading main stream media outlets aid and abet the Republican dirty tricks campaign.
Agreed. I've seen their pattern of behavior for far too long.
I will continue to deny everything.
Robert
Vermont
(unless my demand for sixteen cases of Baby Ruth candy bars are met. Talks are in progress.)
I haven’t had a Baby Ruth in 20 years. They were good.
I appreciate your explanation, but if what you received contains anything newsworthy, the public’s right to know should be an outweighing factor.
Publish everything and let each person make their own decisions as to what is important or newsworthy.