Kamala Harris Is Not Goading Journalists to Publish Emails Iran Stole from Roger Stone

As I’ve alluded to a few times, I was sent what I believe to be three of the files Iran puportedly stole from Trump’s team. I received them after I explained why I thought this hack-and-leak was different than the Hillary one in ways that should influence considerations about publishing:

  • Trump doesn’t compartment his campaign from his crimes, meaning Iran could be — could have been trying, could have succeeded in — stealing information about the Iran-related documents Trump took when he left the White House. The report that Susie Wiles was the intended target of the hack confirms that risk. In addition to running Trump’s campaign, Wiles decided who would be provided defense attorneys paid by the campaign. Aside from the classified information Trump shared with her, she should never have had anything implicating classified discovery and the classified discovery itself should never have left the SCIFs in which it was provided to defense attorneys. But she is likely to know some of what — for example — witnesses like Kash Patel said about classified information.
  • In addition to the hack, Iran allegedly was also trying to solicit a hit squad to kill Trump (indeed, the alleged recruiter, Asif Merchant, was just indicted on Wednesday). That makes the possibility of Iran exploiting internal information from Trump’s campaign (such as travel details) far more dangerous.

I had decided it wasn’t worth participating. And then I got sent files I believe to be those vetting files.

In the last few days, Google has slapped a phishing warning on the files I got sent.

Even though I offered that explanation a month ago, I still get questions from people about why I, and why other outlets, haven’t published the documents.

Don’t get me wrong, other outlets are, without a doubt, exercising a double standard in choosing not to publish these documents, or at least reviewing whether the JD Vance vetting document includes some of the really damning videos surfaced since Trump picked him. It’s not just the Hillary emails in 2016. Every single outlet known to have received these files has also chased the Hunter Biden laptop, even though they never succeeded in implicating Joe Biden in anything found in the laptop. The dick pics were enough to sustain many outlets for a year (and longer, in the case of the NYPost).

But there’s one other big, big difference — one that I think explains the entire difference.

As far as I know, no one in the Kamala Harris campaign is goading journalists to post the documents.

Compare that to 2016, where Trump’s top people were strategizing how to maximize attention on John Podesta’s risotto recipe. Somebody who may be Don Jr was getting all his trolls to push hashtags so “liberal news forced to cover it.” Or 2020, when Trump’s personal lawyer flew around the world, even meeting with known Russian spies, looking for dirt on Joe Biden’s kid. And when a laptop of dick pics dropped in Rudy Giuliani’s lap, like magic, the far right demanded that private social media companies let those dick pics disseminate like wild, because — they claimed — the dissemination of distractions about Hunter Biden was absolutely crucial to Trump’s election strategy.

If I’m right that Kamala Harris has never encouraged journalists to post these documents, there would be a very good reason why not, even beyond the considerable national security risks of encouraging hack-and-leak operations from hostile intelligence services.

Kamala has just 107 days to win an election. And she has a story that she is very very busy telling.

Hack-and-leak operations are about attention, about distraction. If she focused on these stolen documents, she would distract from her own campaign, from the story she is busy telling.

In 2016, Trump used the documents Russia stole to suck up media attention, which served to distract from his own corruption. That’s what he tried in 2020, too. And media outlets have, quite literally, argued that they could avoid accusations of liberal bias by printing error-riddled stories about Hunter Biden, still sucking on that dick pic, three years later.

Hack-and-leak operations help someone like Donald Trump, because too much scrutiny of his own actions might sink his campaign.

But Harris is doing something different than Trump. She’s trying to convince voters that government can improve their lives. She’s trying to convince voters that she cares about their issues and plans to [try to] address them. She needs to sustain their attention long enough to tell that story.

She doesn’t have the time to chase distraction with documents stolen from Trump.

Besides, the press has barely scratched the surface of the corruption or right wing extremism of Trump and his running mate, just sitting in plain sight, such as JD’s claim that we’re still fighting the Civil War and he’s fighting on the side of the south, or Trump rolling out another effort to cash in on his campaign, just weeks before the election.

There’s no shortage of dirt on Donald Trump. Nothing Iran has offered, thus far, at all compares to the stuff sitting out in plain sight.

There is, however, a shortage of time. And wasting time on stolen emails would squander what little time there is.

image_print
33 replies
  1. Alex Campbell says:

    This is a very thoughtful and nuanced piece. The opinions in it probably won’t get picked up by MSM. But I think Marcy is spot on about why Harris campaign isn’t focusing on it. And great point about Trump dirt already out there. If press wont bring up Egypt the vetting stuff is a nothingburger anyway

    • Frank Anon says:

      Like John Podesta’s risotto recipe, I doubt the Iranian hack unearthed anything that the press would consider “news” anyway, so the point about their release only being a time distraction is likely valid. Furthermore, notwithstanding the (clearly potent) Soleimani assassination, what is the benefit of Iran to work to the detriment of Trump at this very time? Their relationship with Russia is becoming almost an intertwining of forces, and the election of Trump is clearly a long-term project of Putin, so why would Iran freewheel at this time. I think a second reason not to deal with anything sent via hack is just the clear potential for it to be obvious disinformation

      • misnomer bjet says:

        By Marcy’s logic, this Iranian hack & leak effort cannot help Democratic campaigns. Assuming the Iranians who did it are not idiots, and I would not make that mistake, it was therefore likely meant to benefit Iran (or more specifically, to benefit the Iranian political faction one might reasonably attribute it to) by contributing fodder for standard Republican campaign reliance on minimizing and drowning out coverage & public comprehension and absorption of the facts of Democratic (vs Republican) policy arguments, and the consequences of respective policy records, such as anthropogenic climate change as a result of the success of Republican policies -and tactics.

        • Rayne says:

          Your comment is two sentences. The second sentence is 90 words long.

          I know you mean well but I need you to think about your audience and the media on which you’re publishing. Unbroken swaths of text are difficult to read on mobile displays, for starters.

    • boloboffin says:

      The thing about hammering Trump on the Egyptian payout is that if you win, now you’re in office having to deal with Egypt, an vitally important partner in all manner of things that keep the modern world happening. If the Harris campaign thinks they don’t need to hammer it to win, they can leave the hammering to us.

  2. SelaSela says:

    Harris have nothing to gain by using this Iranian hacked info. There is no shortage of real dirt on Trump, out there in the public domain, and you don’t need any hacked information to get and use it. The real problem is that the public is desensitized to all of Trump’s crimes, and most of the people who are not voting for Harris already wouldn’t care if he did shot someone on Fifth avenue.

    Clinton, on the other hand, was the “anti-Teflon” candidate. Any dirt her opponents would throw on her would stick it the public’s mind, no matter how fake this dirt is.

    So even if you discount the fact that Harris campaign does care about ethics, and even if you discount the fact that most Harris voters do care about ethics, she still have too much to loose and nothing to gain by using it.

  3. Yogarhythms says:

    Marcy,
    “Hack-and-leak operations are about attention, about distraction.” Humans have a finite consciousness for distraction. I was a Hospice nurse for over 10 years and taught distraction, as a deterrent to a hospice patients final journey with love. Kamala, is on a mission and distractions are the antithesis of forward progress, dream fulfillment. As much as i love unraveling a political ball of thread i applaud your discerning eye for recognizing the shiny object, Iranian hack-and leak, begging to be examined, the closer the better for the time, sink-hole, distraction it is.

  4. Sussex Trafalgar says:

    Superb posting/piece!

    I agree with all that you state.

    And you have integrity!

    I can’t say that for most other experts in your field of work/focus.

  5. originalK says:

    What Sussex Trafalgar said!

    Thanks for the reminder to send my support $$ today. So unfortunate that I’ve been tying the amount to the Truth Social stock price. Maybe it will close higher by 4 p.m. :).

  6. Dark Phoenix says:

    The big Wikileaks email dump occured hours after the Access Hollywood tape went live. Damn right that the point of dumping those emails and then push the MSM to cover them was to change the subject away from Trump’s big mouth.

  7. Attygmgm says:

    Agreed on, and appreciate, the nuance and depth of the piece by Dr. Wheeler. As is typical of her work product and why this site is so valuable.

    The Harris campaign appears to be skilled at choosing what to focus on and on what NOT to focus. The skillfully light touch with which Harris baited Trump in the debate, so skilled it didn’t seem to be baiting him at all, seems of a piece with their decisions about focus. The campaign has considerable game, and gives every indication of being able to keep it up. Let’s hope it lasts through the desperate efforts that will be made to move it off its present course in this second half of her campaign.

  8. GeeSizzle says:

    You can always open those documents AFTER the election, assuming you have some sort of secure facility or sequestered computer, as the documents themselves are probably unsafe.

  9. Appreciative Lurker_CHG-REQD says:

    This is the type of post that keeps me lurking around this site. I feel smarter every time I come here. I wish that journalism like this was happening everywhere.

    [Welcome to emptywheel. Please use a more differentiated username when you comment next as we have had several community members who’ve attempted to use some form of “[modifier] Lurker.” Thanks. /~Rayne]

  10. atriana smith says:

    Did you download and look at the files before the phishing warning appeared?

    Do you know what’s in them?

  11. Savage Librarian says:

    Nuts

    Oh, the glitches have towered
    for Trump, the old coward,
    Since he was overpowered,
    he’s called Harris, Howard.

    His brain is oozing in a slurry,
    Everything is getting blurry,
    After the debate we saw him scurry,
    Dementia now is a big worry.

    On top of that we know he’s nuts,
    And we know he has no guts,
    He’s even running short on buts…
    But he still cheats on his golf putts!

    • Savage Librarian says:

      Exactly 2 years after I told my friends that I thought Kamala Harris should be our next President, Jonathan Capehart wrote this opinion piece on 1/11/19 about her recently published book, The Truths We Hold. Here’s an excerpt. You can also watch the hour long interview on C-SPAN:

      Capehart:
      “…I read the passage in her book aloud and asked, what’s the difference between her gut and Trump’s gut?”

      Harris:
      “I would actually say that assumes facts not in evidence that he has a gut,” she said to loud laughter and applause.

      “There is a thing about leadership, which is you have to have the courage to do things that are in the best interest of the people you lead even if it’s not in your personal best interest. And you can’t be gutless when it comes to making those kinds of decisions.”

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/01/11/go-with-your-gut-kamala-harris/

  12. Barringer says:

    Great post. I would like to add another reason that Vice President Harris is not encouraging journalists to post these documents. She is sensitive to the chaos fatigue we have all been experiencing since Trump first started campaigning in 2015. She provides a calm and steady alternative that is focused on moving the country forward, not miring us in the Trump muck.

  13. David F. Snyder says:

    Spot on. This is all about getting out the vote: even Texas could flip if the state voter turnout is even more than 2020 (when Biden got within striking distance). (Anecdotal evidence: zero Trump-Vance yard signs in my neighborhood, a big difference from 4 years ago).

    Getting reluctant registered voters out to vote is key. Trump has not pivoted to center and Harris claimed that territory. That strategy succeeds only if voter turnout is record-setting, because she started this race very late in the season. Republicans win only when turnout is low. Please help to get out the vote.

  14. PeaceRme says:

    Kamala’s tactic is so NOT codependency. It is actually a healthy way to cope with a personality/Republican Party as it currently stands. Riddled with corruption and crime and high as a kite on power. She actually is behaving in an effective way. Stay focused. Don’t get reactive. Mind your emotional triggers. Stay in wise mind. (Reading your emotions AND the facts!).

    And everyone can feel the shift from codependent reactivity which actually means that the personality, the addiction, (greed) is in charge or leading the energy as the coda reacts to the power and control/authoritarian. She took control because she controlled herself. We could feel it. And we felt safe for the first time. She’s not reacting in a dance with him. She danced her own dance.

    That’s recovery. She can do this. Because she’s being a leader instead of a reactor!! Oh I want her to react sometimes. My own reactivity. And I felt disappointed once or twice when she pivoted. Where’s the drama? She made none. Other than peacefully staying focused on her objective. For all of us.

    I am giddy. If there’s a chance for truth to win? This is the first more prominent time I have ever experienced the shift.

    No more codependency. He has no power. She took it from him by refusing to be led. And instead leading him as he reacted and defended.

    • dimmsdale says:

      I love this comment; it rings true to me, especially your second paragraph. My sense is an automatic reactivity to a certain manifestation of male dominance is baked into most of us, and has controlled our culture for far too long. I love the hopeful feeling that women in the public eye, like Kamala, can change that simply by being real.

  15. zscoreUSA says:

    That’s interesting about the targeting of Wiles. How does the targeting of Roger Stone play into this?

    After WaPo reported his name in their story about the hacking, Roger Stone’s attorney gave CNN a comment nicer than “Hey CNN get fucked”.

    During a previous election, Roger has been a liason between Trump and a country that is actively trying to get the United States into a war with Iran on its behalf, and for the 3rd election in a row, actively trying to get Trump elected.

    When CNN, via a Don Lemon exclusive, broke the news of the first Mueller indictment being filed, Roger went off the rails at CNN in general, and racistly vicious at Don Lemon in particular. Which caused him to get kicked off Twitter (coincidentally just about an hour after the Q poster started on 4chan claiming Hillary being charged). When Stone was arrested in January 2019, CNN was there to film. There’s a personal level scorn held for CNN even above MSM in general.

    Hence, Roger Stone’s cordial comment through a lawyer after embarrassingly getting had by Iran, just seems off.

  16. harpie says:

    There is a slight possibility of a connection with Iran to what the FBI is calling
    an assassination attempt on TRUMP, which I wrote some comments about here:

    https://www.emptywheel.net/2024/09/15/how-kamala-harris-dodged-the-two-truths-problem/#comment-1070583

    The comment THREAD begins with this Marcy post:

    https://bsky.app/profile/emptywheel.bsky.social/post/3l47va5jdpz2m
    September 15, 2024 at 5:04 PM

    For those expressing skepticism abt an assassination attempt, remember that the guy they arrested in July, Asif Merchant, was trying to find a hit squad. The local Palm Beach Feebs were part of that investigation.

Comments are closed.