Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Podesta emails

The Podesta emails consist of over 50,000 messages and attachments from the personal Gmail account of John Podesta, who served as chairman of Hillary Clinton's 2016 U.S. presidential campaign, hacked in March 2016 via a spear-phishing attack on a campaign aide and published by WikiLeaks in 33 serialized batches from October 7 to November 6, 2016.^[1]^[2]^[3] ![page7-190px-Intelligence_Community_Assessment_-_Assessing_Russian_Activities_and_Intentions_in_Recent_US_Elections.pdf.jpg][float-right] The contents offered a detailed view of the campaign's internal dynamics, including deliberations on messaging, donor fundraising, and policy positioning, with specific examples such as excerpts from Clinton's remunerated speeches to financial institutions revealing private endorsements of policies like the Trans-Pacific Partnership that contrasted with her public rhetoric during the primaries.^[4]^[5] Additional disclosures highlighted coordination between the campaign and the Democratic National Committee to counter Senator Bernie Sanders' challenge, as well as efforts to shape media coverage through favorable story suggestions to journalists.^[6] The leaks, occurring alongside Democratic National Committee hacks and timed close to the election, were assessed by the U.S. Intelligence Community as part of a Russian government-directed influence operation to undermine Clinton and boost Donald Trump, with the GRU implicated in the Podesta intrusion per subsequent indictments.^[7]^[8] While the emails' authenticity was affirmed by the Clinton campaign and independent verification, their release amplified scrutiny of campaign practices and contributed to narratives of elite opacity, though claims of direct electoral causation remain debated; WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange maintained the source was not Russian state actors.^[9] The episode also spawned fringe interpretations, such as the baseless Pizzagate theory alleging a child trafficking ring, underscoring risks of unfiltered data dissemination amid polarized discourse.^[10]

Data Acquisition

Spear-Phishing Attack

On March 19, 2016, John Podesta, chairman of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign, received a spear-phishing email targeting his personal Gmail account.^[11]^[12] The email mimicked a legitimate Google security notification, alerting the recipient to potential unauthorized access and urging them to change their password via a provided link.^[13]^[14] This link was a shortened URL (using bit.ly) that directed to a counterfeit Google login page designed to capture the user's credentials.^[15]^[16] Podesta forwarded the suspicious email to his aide for advice, who misinterpreted the situation and responded by instructing him to "click the link" rather than recognizing it as a phishing attempt and advising against interaction.^[14]^[17] This error led Podesta to enter his username and password on the fake site, resulting in the theft of his Gmail credentials and subsequent access to approximately 50,000 emails.^[13]^[17] The incident underscored human factors in the breach, as Podesta's reliance on an unencrypted personal Gmail account—despite known vulnerabilities in such platforms for high-profile targets—bypassed institutional security measures employed by the campaign.^[18]^[14] Cybersecurity analyses emphasized that the attack succeeded primarily due to the failure to verify the email's authenticity, rather than exploiting software flaws in Gmail itself.^[16]

Initial Compromise and Extraction

On March 19, 2016, following a successful spear-phishing attempt, hackers compromised John Podesta's personal Gmail account, enabling unauthorized access to its contents.^[8] Within two days, by March 21, 2016, the intruders had exfiltrated more than 50,000 email messages, including attachments, spanning from 2008 to 2016, with a concentration on communications related to the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign during that period.^[12] This harvest provided comprehensive access to Podesta's email threads, calendars, and contact lists, though forensic analysis indicated the breach remained confined to the individual account without evidence of lateral movement into broader Clinton campaign or Democratic National Committee networks.^[8] The extracted data was not publicly disclosed immediately after acquisition; instead, it was retained by the hackers for several months, allowing for internal review and potential operational use prior to any external dissemination.^[11] Cybersecurity assessments from the period, including those referenced in subsequent U.S. government investigations, confirmed that the exfiltration occurred rapidly post-compromise, leveraging standard Gmail functionalities exploited via stolen credentials, without indications of advanced persistent access beyond the initial harvest window in March-April 2016.^[8]

Attribution of the Hack

Evidence Linking to Russian Intelligence

The U.S. Intelligence Community Assessment (ICA) released on January 6, 2017, attributed the compromise of John Podesta's email account, along with Democratic National Committee (DNC) systems, to Russia's Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (GRU), specifically Units 74455 and 26165, with high confidence.^[7] The ICA cited forensic evidence including unique malware signatures, IP addresses linked to Russian military-controlled infrastructure, and operational tactics consistent with prior GRU-linked activities attributed to the hacking group known as Fancy Bear (APT28).^[7] The Special Counsel investigation led by Robert Mueller confirmed in its 2019 report that GRU officers orchestrated the Podesta hack through spear-phishing emails sent on March 19, 2016, which tricked Podesta into entering credentials on a fake Google login page hosted on GRU-controlled domains.^[8] Mueller's team detailed how the GRU extracted over 50,000 emails from Podesta's account between March and April 2016, using customized malware variants like X-Agent and X-Tunnel, which shared code overlaps with tools deployed in the contemporaneous DNC intrusion.^[8] A July 13, 2018, federal grand jury indictment charged 12 GRU officers—identified as members of Units 26165 and 74455—with direct involvement in the Podesta breach, alleging they registered 29 domains mimicking legitimate services like Google and targeted over 300 Clinton campaign personnel via phishing infrastructure activated hours after initial DNC compromises.^[20] The indictment highlighted evidentiary links such as victim IP logs tracing back to servers in the Netherlands and the United States under GRU operational control, as well as spear-phishing lures containing grammatical errors and phrasing patterns matching known Fancy Bear campaigns against NATO allies and Ukrainian entities.^[20] These methods exhibited direct parallels to the DNC hack, including the deployment of X-Agent implants for data exfiltration starting April 18, 2016, reinforcing attribution through consistent tooling and timing.^[20]

Criticisms and Alternative Explanations

The attribution of the Podesta email compromise to Russian military intelligence (GRU) has been challenged on grounds of its circumstantial basis, relying primarily on indicators of compromise (IOCs) such as malware signatures and IP addresses shared across incidents, without public disclosure of direct forensic artifacts from Russian infrastructure. Independent cybersecurity analyses, including those questioning private firm assessments like CrowdStrike's (which handled related DNC intrusions), highlight that such IOCs can be fabricated or repurposed by adversaries, as no U.S. investigators accessed GRU systems for verification. For instance, cybersecurity expert Jeffrey Carr argued that without chain-of-custody evidence or binary analysis confirming unique state ties, attributions remain probabilistic rather than conclusive, potentially vulnerable to false flags.^[21]^[22] Former intelligence professionals, organized as Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS), extended skepticism from DNC forensics to the broader 2016 email releases, including Podesta's, citing metadata transfer speeds and file access patterns inconsistent with remote hacking over the internet, suggesting possible local downloads or non-state vectors in some cases. While Podesta's intrusion involved a spear-phishing email on March 19, 2016, rather than server-level access, VIPS and allies like former NSA technical director William Binney questioned the absence of declassified proof linking dumps directly to GRU motive for electoral disruption, positing alternatives like insider exfiltration or opportunistic actors exploiting U.S. vulnerabilities. These views, though dismissed by mainstream outlets, underscore gaps in proving intent beyond opportunity, especially given the Intelligence Community Assessment's compressed timeline and reliance on unshared classified data.^[23] A primary causal factor emphasized in critiques is Podesta's personal security practices, which enabled the initial breach via user error rather than advanced foreign tradecraft alone. On March 19, 2016, Podesta received a spear-phishing email mimicking a Google security alert, falsely claiming unauthorized access and prompting a password change; he forwarded it to an aide who mistakenly advised clicking the link, leading to credential harvest on a spoofed site. Podesta's password, reported as a simple variation like "p@ssw0rd" in subsequent analyses, exemplified reuse and weakness, amplifying phishing success without needing sophisticated exploits. This human-centric vulnerability, per cybersecurity reviews, shifts emphasis from state sophistication to basic hygiene failures, as similar low-tech methods have breached non-political targets repeatedly, reducing the necessity of invoking foreign agency.^[24]^[25]

Publication Process

Transfer to WikiLeaks

The hacked emails from John Podesta's account were transferred to WikiLeaks on or about September 14, 2016, according to a U.S. Department of Justice indictment charging 12 officers from Russia's Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) with election interference.^[20] The indictment alleges that GRU personnel uploaded an encrypted archive containing over 300,000 Podesta emails to an online file-sharing service and separately messaged WikiLeaks the password, enabling secure access while obscuring the origin through encryption and anonymity tools.^[26] This method aligns with WikiLeaks' established secure submission protocols, which include encrypted channels and pseudonymous communication to protect sources. WikiLeaks has maintained strict source anonymity, declining to disclose details of the submission process beyond confirming receipt via protected means. Founder Julian Assange stated in November 2016 that the Podesta emails' sources were "not state parties," rejecting claims of direct involvement by Russian intelligence and framing the material as originating from non-governmental whistleblowers routed through multiple intermediaries to evade traceability.^[27]^[28] Assange emphasized WikiLeaks' policy of not revealing sourcing to safeguard leakers, while noting that the organization's verification relied on cryptographic signatures embedded in the emails themselves.^[29] Earlier in June 2016, portions of other Democratic-targeted materials stolen by the same alleged GRU units appeared on DCLeaks.com, a website controlled by Russian military intelligence, suggesting a pattern of using front personas for initial dissemination before channeling select archives to WikiLeaks.^[20] However, the bulk of Podesta's emails bypassed public previews on such sites, proceeding directly to WikiLeaks' secure pipeline for the October 7, 2016, initial release.^[8] These allegations from U.S. investigations contrast with WikiLeaks' assertions of independent, non-state origins, highlighting ongoing disputes over the chain of custody.^[27]

Release Timeline and Strategy

WikiLeaks commenced the publication of emails from John Podesta's account on October 7, 2016, timing the initial release to coincide with the emergence of the Access Hollywood tape featuring Donald Trump, which dominated news coverage that day.^[30] The first batch included thousands of messages, marking the start of a deliberate serialization strategy involving near-daily increments to maintain sustained visibility in the media and public sphere during the closing phase of the 2016 U.S. presidential election.^[4] This approach contrasted with a one-time mass disclosure, opting instead for 37 incremental batches that collectively exceeded 58,000 emails by early November 2016.^[31] ^[1] The staggered releases extended through Election Day on November 8, 2016, with examples including additional tranches of approximately 2,000 emails on October 10 and further batches accumulating to over 11,000 by mid-October.^[32] ^[33] WikiLeaks implemented partial redactions to obscure sensitive personal identifiers, such as Social Security numbers, in select emails prior to publication, citing a policy of minimizing harm to non-public figures while prioritizing transparency.^[1] Post-election, the organization made the full corpus available as a searchable database, facilitating broader analysis without the constraints of timed drops.^[1] This release cadence was designed to embed the disclosures into ongoing election narratives, leveraging media amplification through previews and search functionalities provided to journalists, thereby influencing discourse incrementally rather than through volume overload.^[5] The strategy ensured persistent coverage, as outlets parsed batches for reportable items, extending the emails' relevance across the campaign's final month.^[6]

Authenticity Verification

Confirmation of Genuine Emails

Independent cybersecurity analyses verified the authenticity of the vast majority of the Podesta emails released by WikiLeaks through examination of digital signatures and headers. Many emails contained valid DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) signatures from Google's infrastructure, cryptographically confirming that the messages originated from Gmail servers without post-transmission alteration to headers or body content.^[34] ^[35] For instance, security researcher Robert Graham authenticated a specific July 25, 2015, email discussing Tim Kaine via its intact digital signature, demonstrating unaltered transmission from the original sender domain.^[35] Further validation came from cross-referencing email contents with verifiable public records and internal consistencies, such as threading sequences aligning with known campaign timelines and participant identities. Journalists and experts, including those at PolitiFact, concluded after review that most emails were genuine, with no evidence of widespread fabrication despite theoretical risks of selective alterations in unsigned messages.^[36] Podesta's hacked Gmail account was confirmed as the source, and analyses estimated authenticity rates approaching 99% based on these forensic matches, excluding isolated cases of potential tampering addressed elsewhere.^[36] The Clinton campaign and Podesta did not issue broad denials of the emails' legitimacy; instead, Podesta acknowledged the hack and the release of his real correspondence in public statements, focusing responses on contextual explanations rather than authenticity disputes.^[36] This implicit confirmation, combined with the absence of successful challenges to core dumps, underscored the leaks' empirical validity as representations of internal communications from March to October 2016.^[36]

Instances of Fabrications or Alterations

While the Podesta emails released by WikiLeaks were overwhelmingly verified as authentic through independent cross-checks against public records, recipient confirmations, and digital signatures, isolated forgeries emerged external to the official archive.^[36] These fabrications, often bearing fabricated metadata mimicking WikiLeaks' format, were disseminated by anonymous actors on social media and fringe sites rather than included in the 20,000+ emails published between October 7 and November 6, 2016.^[37] A notable example involved a forged email alleging the Clinton campaign transferred $50,000 to Debbie Wasserman Schultz to influence her retention as DNC chair after her resignation amid primary controversies; this document cited a nonexistent WikiLeaks email ID (30613) and lacked verifiable headers or content alignment with authenticated correspondence.^[37] Fact-checkers identified it as a hoax shortly after its circulation in September 2016, with no trace in the Podesta archive. Similarly, altered or invented attachments, such as manipulated vice-presidential shortlists purportedly from Podesta's account, surfaced online but failed authentication against real vetting discussions in verified emails, like those dated July 2016 referencing Elizabeth Warren or Cory Booker.^[36] WikiLeaks maintained a verification protocol for submissions, including cryptographic checks where feasible, and explicitly rejected known fakes to preserve publication integrity, as articulated by editor Julian Assange in response to forgery allegations during the 2016 releases.^[36] Despite unsubstantiated warnings from the Clinton campaign about potential Russian-inserted alterations—lacking specific examples or evidence—these external fabrications represented fewer than 1% of referenced documents in public analysis, with their rapid debunking via archive searches underscoring the leaks' overall reliability.^[36] Third-party exaggerations, such as inflating a genuine October 8, 2015, email about artist Marina Abramović's "spirit cooking" dinner (email ID 15893) into unsubstantiated ritual claims, further blurred lines but stemmed from interpretive distortions rather than textual alterations in sourced material.

Major Contents and Revelations

Internal Campaign Biases and Primary Election Influence

Emails from John Podesta's account, released by WikiLeaks, exposed communications indicating favoritism toward Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primary contest against Bernie Sanders. These included discussions among campaign aides on leveraging Clinton's early advantages in superdelegates to marginalize Sanders' challenge. For instance, a March 16, 2016, memo circulated within the campaign emphasized Clinton's "nearly insurmountable lead" in both pledged delegates and superdelegates, framing it as a tool to demonstrate her inevitability and discourage Sanders' continued viability.^[38] Similarly, aides noted Sanders' campaign's shift in rhetoric on superdelegates—from downplaying their role to aggressively courting them—and recommended counter-strategies to solidify Clinton's support among party insiders.^[39] The emails further revealed direct interventions to aid Clinton's debate preparations. On March 5, 2016, interim DNC chair Donna Brazile emailed Clinton campaign communications director Jennifer Palmieri the precise wording of a planned CNN debate question on the Flint water crisis, scheduled for the March 6 primary debate in Flint, Michigan.^[40] ^[41] An additional email from Brazile that week provided advance notice of a question on capital punishment, contravening CNN's guidelines against sharing such details with campaigns.^[42] These disclosures prompted CNN to sever ties with Brazile as a contributor and fueled accusations of partisan bias in primary debate moderation.^[41] Internal campaign correspondence also highlighted pre-primary financial arrangements that positioned Clinton to exert influence over DNC resources. A joint fundraising agreement signed in August 2015 between the Clinton Victory Fund and the DNC effectively ceded control of the party's finances, staffing, and strategy to the Clinton campaign months before the first votes, despite the DNC's public posture of neutrality.^[43] This setup, later corroborated by Brazile in her account of discovering the terms while managing the DNC post-leak, allowed Clinton's team to direct expenditures and personnel in ways that aligned with her candidacy, underscoring structural advantages over Sanders.^[43]

Financial Ties and Foreign Donor Concerns

In a memorandum forwarded in an August 2014 email from Hillary Clinton to John Podesta, it was asserted that the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar were providing "clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region." ^[44] This assessment, drawn from U.S. intelligence sources, recommended leveraging these governments' vulnerabilities—including their financial contributions to extremist elements—to influence policy, amid concurrent donations to the Clinton Foundation totaling between $10 million and $25 million from Saudi Arabia alone.^[45] Qatar had similarly contributed millions to the Foundation during Hillary Clinton's tenure as Secretary of State, raising questions about potential conflicts given the outlined support for groups like ISIL.^[46] Podesta emails also referenced the 2010 Uranium One transaction, in which Russia's state-owned Rosatom acquired a Canadian company controlling significant U.S. uranium assets, approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), on which the State Department—then led by Hillary Clinton—held a voting position.^[47] ^[48] One email discussed strategies to counter media scrutiny of the deal, emphasizing that national security reviews by agencies including State had found no issues, while noting over $145 million in contributions to the Clinton Foundation from individuals and entities linked to Uranium One investors around the approval period.^[47] Internal correspondence highlighted ethical debates, including Podesta's associations through his brother's lobbying firm, which represented Uranium One interests.^[1] A 12-page internal memo circulated among Clinton aides, as revealed in the emails, detailed extensive overlaps between Clinton Foundation donors—particularly foreign governments and corporations—and access to policy discussions or meetings, framing it as "Bill Clinton Inc." dynamics.^[49] ^[50] For instance, emails documented concerns over foreign entities like Morocco securing Foundation-hosted events in exchange for diplomatic alignment, with aides expressing unease about appearances of preferential treatment tied to multimillion-dollar pledges.^[51] Campaign staff debated disclosure and optics of these ties, acknowledging patterns where major donors received expedited access to Clinton networks, though no emails provided direct evidence of quid pro quo exchanges.^[52]

Media Coordination and Access Arrangements

Emails from John Podesta's account revealed instances where Clinton campaign staff sought input on or provided advance review of journalistic work to align coverage with campaign messaging. In an October 30, 2015, exchange with Politico chief political correspondent Glenn Thrush, Thrush shared an outline of an upcoming article on Hillary Clinton's campaign operations, stating, "Here's What I Hope to Convey in the piece," and requested feedback, acknowledging his limited internal knowledge and reliance on campaign guidance to shape the narrative. ^[53] Thrush further noted his intent to avoid portraying the campaign negatively without basis, illustrating a collaborative dynamic where campaign officials influenced story angles prior to publication.^[54] Campaign documents included assessments of reporters' reliability and willingness to cooperate. A April 2015 memo from aide Marisa Schultz to press secretary Jennifer Palmieri rated journalists on a scale of friendliness, labeling Maggie Haberman—then at Politico, later at The New York Times—as "friendly (but NOT always a friend)" due to her history of producing stories aligned with Clinton interests, while deeming others like Jennifer Rubin of The Washington Post as adversarial.^[55] ^[56] Similar evaluations categorized reporters such as Jonathan Martin of Politico as "friendly," facilitating targeted outreach for favorable placement of campaign talking points.^[55] These communications extended to off-the-record briefings designed to preempt or suppress unfavorable reporting. For example, campaign staff coordinated exclusive access for select outlets to refine narratives, such as providing detailed briefings to mitigate stories on Clinton Foundation ties, ensuring reporters received curated information that campaign officials vetted for alignment.^[57] ^[55] In cases of potential negative coverage, emails documented efforts to edit or adjust drafts, as seen in Thrush's solicitation of Podesta's views to "help me out" on interpretive elements, demonstrating direct causal input rather than passive information sharing. Such practices underscored a symbiotic arrangement, where access privileges were exchanged for narrative control, challenging claims of arm's-length journalistic independence.^[57]

Paid Speeches and Elite Networks

Hillary Clinton delivered three paid speeches to Goldman Sachs in October 2013, June 2014, and October 2014, as well as additional addresses to the firm in 2015, each compensated at $225,000.^[58]^[59] These engagements, arranged through speaking agencies like Harry Walker, totaled over $675,000 from Goldman Sachs alone and were part of a broader series of Wall Street appearances yielding millions in fees post her tenure as Secretary of State.^[60]^[61] Transcripts of these speeches, obtained via hacked emails from John Podesta's account and published by WikiLeaks, revealed Clinton expressing views more favorable to financial interests than her public campaign positions. In a 2013 Goldman Sachs Builders Initiative event, she advocated for "open trade and open borders" and envisioned a "hemispheric common market," positions aligning with free trade policies like the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which she later criticized during her 2016 candidacy as insufficiently protective of American workers.^[62]^[63] She also described Wall Street executives as "the smart ones" providing essential capital, while acknowledging the need for regulation but downplaying systemic overregulation's risks, contrasting her campaign's emphasis on reining in banking excesses post-2008 financial crisis.^[64]^[65] The Clinton campaign internally compiled memos extracting potentially damaging excerpts from these speech transcripts, reflecting apprehension over their public disclosure amid demands from rivals like Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primaries.^[66]^[67] Podesta, as campaign chairman, participated in strategic discussions on withholding the full transcripts to mitigate voter perceptions of undue Wall Street influence, advising against voluntary release to avoid amplifying criticisms of elitism and policy inconsistency.^[68]^[67] These revelations underscored Clinton's and Podesta's entwinement with elite financial and lobbying circles; Podesta co-founded the Podesta Group with his brother Tony, a leading firm that represented foreign governments and corporations, including work later scrutinized under foreign agent registration laws.^[1] The firm's activities, involving high-profile clients seeking U.S. policy influence, exemplified the interconnected networks bridging campaign operatives, Wall Street, and international lobbying post the email disclosures.^[69]^[70]

Other Notable Discussions

One email exchange highlighted critiques of traditional Catholic practices, with activist Sandy Newman proposing to Podesta on February 11, 2012, the concept of a "Catholic Spring"—analogous to the Arab Spring—to dismantle what he termed the Church's "middle ages dictatorship" and advance reforms like internal democracy, gender equality, and resolution of issues such as contraceptive coverage, citing widespread use of birth control among Catholic women despite episcopal opposition. Podesta replied by noting organizations like Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good and Catholics United as vehicles for progressive influence within the Church, suggesting a strategy of building from the grassroots level.^[71] Campaign strategies revealed pragmatic considerations in leveraging identity politics, as evidenced by a March 2016 internal memorandum from Podesta to Hillary Clinton listing 39 potential vice presidential candidates sorted into "rough food groups" delineated by racial, ethnic, and gender categories—such as Latino figures like Julian Castro and women like Tammy Baldwin—to optimize demographic balance on the ticket, overriding purely merit-based selections for electoral inclusivity. Similarly, deliberations on gun control messaging involved revising Clinton's prepared remarks to temper aggressive stances, reflecting concerns over alienating moderate or rural voters despite progressive advocacy for stricter measures.^[72] Personal emails provided insights into elite routines, including Podesta's detailed guidance on achieving creamy risotto texture by gradually incorporating liquid into the rice to release starches, a method shared in a 2015 exchange emphasizing patience in cooking over rushed techniques. Such disclosures underscored the domestic habits of political insiders, contrasting high-level strategizing with everyday preferences like quality ingredients and precise preparation.^[73]

Immediate Reactions

Clinton Campaign and Democratic Responses

The Clinton campaign characterized the WikiLeaks releases of John Podesta's emails, beginning on October 7, 2016, as elements of a Russian-orchestrated disinformation and interference operation designed to aid Donald Trump. Campaign spokespeople repeatedly highlighted U.S. intelligence assessments attributing the hacks to Russian government actors, framing the leaks as illicitly obtained material disseminated to manipulate the election rather than engaging with the substance of internal discussions revealed.^[74]^[75] John Podesta, whose Gmail account was compromised via a March 2016 spear-phishing attack, publicly asserted that the Russian government was responsible for the breach and subsequent publication, while declining to dispute the emails' authenticity but stressing their weaponization by foreign adversaries.^[6] In public appearances, including the October 19, 2016, presidential debate, Hillary Clinton redirected attention from the leaks' contents to the broader narrative of Russian election meddling, declaring that "every expert" concurred Russia aimed to undermine American democracy by aiding Trump through such disclosures. She portrayed the releases as timed interventions benefiting her opponent, without offering point-by-point rebuttals to specific email excerpts cited by Trump, such as those involving campaign strategies or donor influences. This approach aligned with campaign messaging that portrayed scrutiny of the emails as falling into a trap set by foreign actors, thereby prioritizing condemnation of the sourcing mechanism over forensic analysis of the documented internal deliberations.^[74] Democratic National Committee officials echoed the Clinton campaign's emphasis on foreign attribution, integrating it into statements decrying the leaks as part of a pattern of cyberattacks targeting Democratic entities since the earlier DNC breach in 2016. Rather than issuing comprehensive fact-checks or contextual defenses against revelations like primary election maneuvering or media relations, DNC communications focused on discrediting WikiLeaks as a conduit for Kremlin-directed information operations, which avoided direct confrontation with verifiable communications among party and campaign figures. This defensive posture persisted through late October 2016, as daily dumps continued, with Democrats attributing any electoral distraction to adversarial tactics rather than substantive policy or ethical lapses exposed in the correspondence.^[6]^[76]

Media Coverage and Interpretations

Major U.S. media outlets, including CNN and The New York Times, predominantly framed the Podesta email releases as lacking substantive revelations, often labeling them as devoid of a "smoking gun" despite documented instances of internal biases, donor influences, and journalistic coordination within the emails.^[77]^[78] Coverage prioritized outrage over the hacking method—spearphishing attacks traced to Russian actors—rather than empirical analysis of the contents, such as discussions of primary election strategies or foreign funding concerns, which were released unredacted via WikiLeaks starting March 19, 2016, with major batches in October.^[6]^[79] This emphasis aligned with broader narratives of foreign election interference, as outlined in subsequent intelligence assessments, but sidelined causal links between the exposed communications and eroded institutional credibility.^[80] Fact-checking organizations, such as FactCheck.org and PolitiFact, routinely verified the emails' authenticity—confirming over 20,000 messages from Podesta's account spanned 2008 to 2016—but contextualized contentious elements like pay-to-play allegations or media scripting as commonplace in U.S. politics, without addressing deeper implications for transparency norms or voter perceptions of elite capture.^[81]^[82] For example, claims drawn from emails about Clinton's paid speeches were rated as misleading when framed as corrupt, with fact-checkers attributing them to routine elite networking rather than systemic conflicts, a dismissal that overlooked verifiable patterns of access reciprocity evident in the raw data.^[37] In contrast, alternative media platforms, including outlets like The Guardian's opinion sections and independent sites amplifying WikiLeaks dumps, delved into unfiltered details—such as elite policy discussions or campaign-media symbiosis—portraying the leaks as a window into undemocratic power structures, which mainstream interpretations largely elided.^[83] This divergence underscored partisan interpretive gaps: legacy media, influenced by institutional alignments, minimized content to sustain focus on adversarial hacks, while non-mainstream voices leveraged the emails' granularity to critique domestic accountability, fostering debates on source transparency amid evident left-leaning biases in establishment reporting.^[84]^[85]

Republican and Trump Campaign Utilization

The Trump campaign extensively referenced the Podesta emails during the final weeks of the 2016 presidential election, incorporating excerpts into rally speeches to highlight perceived inconsistencies in the Clinton campaign's public positions on issues such as trade policies and Wall Street influence.^[86] For instance, on October 10, 2016, following the initial WikiLeaks release of over 2,000 emails, Donald Trump cited specific contents during a rally in Pennsylvania, using them to question Hillary Clinton's authenticity on economic matters.^[87] These references often focused on leaked transcripts of Clinton's paid speeches, which the campaign argued demonstrated elite favoritism, contrasting with her campaign rhetoric.^[88] Rally crowds responded to these disclosures with chants of "lock her up," which Trump linked to revelations in the emails about Clinton Foundation access and potential conflicts of interest, amplifying calls for accountability over pay-to-play arrangements.^[74] A notable instance occurred on October 11, 2016, when Trump highlighted a fresh batch of emails suggesting coordination between Clinton aides and the Department of Justice, prompting immediate audience chants.^[87] Campaign surrogates and ads echoed these points, citing email threads on foreign donor influences, such as a October 21 accusation of pay-for-play involving Morocco's Clinton Global Initiative commitments, though without producing dedicated television ads solely on Podesta-specific content.^[89] Conservative media outlets, including Breitbart News, played a key role in dissemination by publishing detailed analyses and compilations of email highlights, such as media coordination lists revealed on October 14, 2016, which fueled viral sharing on social platforms and alternative news sites.^[90] These efforts created accessible narratives around hypocrisies, like internal biases against primary challengers, reaching audiences skeptical of mainstream coverage.^[91] The Trump team strategically timed public engagements to coincide with WikiLeaks batches, such as a October 24, 2016, Florida rally where Trump touted the leaks amid tightening polls, correlating releases with reported shifts in battleground states from mid-October onward.^[92] Investigations, including the Mueller probe, found preparatory discussions within the campaign for potential email dumps but no evidence of direct coordination with WikiLeaks or the leakers.^[93] This approach exposed internal Clinton dynamics without reliance on unverified claims, leveraging the emails' public availability to challenge opponent credibility.

Long-Term Impact

Role in 2016 Election Dynamics

The Podesta emails, released by WikiLeaks in batches starting October 7, 2016, correlated with a observable tightening in national and battleground state polls during the campaign's final month. Hillary Clinton's lead over Donald Trump, which reached a peak of about 7 percentage points in mid-October according to aggregated forecasts, contracted to roughly 5.7 points by late October prior to the FBI's October 28 announcement on additional emails.^[94] In key battleground states such as Pennsylvania, Michigan, and Wisconsin—where Trump ultimately prevailed by margins under 1%—polling data reflected narrowing gaps, with Clinton's advantages eroding amid heightened voter awareness of the leaks, as evidenced by elevated Google Trends searches for WikiLeaks outpacing those for contemporaneous FBI-related queries.^[94]^[95] National exit polls indicated that voters deciding in October favored Trump 51% to 37%, a demographic shift sufficient to account for small but decisive swings in competitive states.^[94]^[96] Amplification of the emails occurred primarily through social media dissemination and integration into Trump's rally rhetoric, where he repeatedly invoked WikiLeaks material to underscore themes of elite self-dealing and institutional bias within the Clinton campaign.^[97]^[87] This messaging targeted working-class audiences alienated by revelations of internal Democratic favoritism and media coordination, fostering perceptions of Clinton as emblematic of disconnected governance.^[5] While mainstream coverage remained limited, the leaks' viral spread on alternative platforms sustained public interest, contrasting with subdued traditional media engagement that prioritized other narratives.^[94] Counterfactual evaluations suggest the emails' protracted exposure—spanning over 50,000 documents through election day—exerted a more persistent drag on Clinton's credibility than the singular October 7 Access Hollywood tape, which briefly depressed but did not derail Trump's momentum among his base.^[94] Voter trust metrics for Clinton hovered stably around 30% in October polls, yet the leaks reinforced preexisting skepticism among undecideds, contributing to late shifts that analyses attribute partly to confirmed insider machinations rather than transient scandals.^[94] In battlegrounds, where outcomes hinged on margins of 0.2% to 0.7%, the influence on late deciders aligns with potential 2-3% effective swings tied to leak familiarity in post-election surveys of swing voter recall.^[94]^[96]

Investigations and Legal Aftermath

The Special Counsel investigation, initiated by Robert Mueller's appointment on May 17, 2017, scrutinized the 2016 Russian election interference, including the spearphishing attack on John Podesta's personal Gmail account that compromised over 50,000 emails. On July 13, 2018, a federal grand jury indicted 12 GRU officers for conspiracy to commit wire fraud, aggravated identity theft, and hacking offenses tied to the Podesta breach, the DNC intrusion, and related data exfiltration beginning in March 2016.^[20] ^[8] The investigation attributed the operation to Russian military intelligence but identified no sufficient evidence of criminal conspiracy between the Trump campaign and Russia regarding the hack or leaks.^[8] Despite extensive review of the email contents—which included discussions on Clinton Foundation donors, speech arrangements, and internal campaign strategies—no U.S. prosecutions ensued from alleged improprieties in those communications. The bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, through its 2017–2020 inquiry, corroborated the GRU's role in the Podesta hack via declassified assessments and witness testimonies, detailing how the stolen emails were funneled through intermediaries like Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks before WikiLeaks publication.^[98] Volume 5 of the committee's report emphasized the hack's execution as directed by Vladimir Putin to undermine Clinton, yet debates persisted on the operation's domestic facilitation or exploitation, with no committee-driven referrals yielding charges against U.S. entities for mishandling or conflicts revealed in the emails.^[98] Earlier FBI probes into Clinton Foundation activities, informed partly by email allusions to donor access, generated internal referrals but concluded without indictments, reflecting prosecutorial thresholds not met despite public scrutiny. Freedom of Information Act litigation and related suits post-2016, often by groups seeking unredacted campaign or State Department records intersecting with Podesta's disclosures, have incrementally released contextual documents but uncovered no material new evidence beyond the WikiLeaks archive of approximately 20,000 Podesta emails. These efforts highlight enduring accountability voids, as no federal actions addressed potential ethical lapses in the emails—such as foreign donor influence coordination—despite initial Justice Department reviews declining broader Clinton Foundation charges.^[99]

Debates on Foreign Interference and Domestic Accountability

The U.S. Intelligence Community's January 2017 assessment concluded with high confidence that Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016, including the hacking of John Podesta's email account and subsequent leaks via WikiLeaks, aimed at undermining Hillary Clinton's candidacy and boosting Donald Trump.^[7] This view, coordinated by the CIA, FBI, and NSA, attributed the spear-phishing operation targeting Podesta on March 19, 2016, to Russian military intelligence (GRU), with the released emails intended to sow discord within Democratic ranks.^[7] Post-election empirical analyses, including machine and hand recounts in pivotal states, found no evidence of foreign-induced alterations sufficient to alter outcomes. In Wisconsin, the December 2016 recount certified Trump's victory, uncovering 131 additional votes for him and narrowing his margin by only 105 votes overall, from 22,748 to 22,643.^[100] Michigan's partial recount and Pennsylvania's court-denied effort similarly reaffirmed results, with discrepancies attributable to standard human error rather than systemic manipulation, underscoring that while hacks occurred, they did not demonstrably flip electoral votes in swing states.^[101] Special Counsel Robert Mueller's 2019 report confirmed Russian intrusions but identified no coordinated impact on vote tallies themselves.^[8] The Podesta emails exposed internal Democratic mechanisms favoring Clinton over Bernie Sanders, including DNC staff communications deriding Sanders as an "opportunist" and discussing strategies to question his religious practices, prompting DNC Chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz's resignation on July 24, 2016.^[102] Other revelations highlighted coordination between the Clinton campaign and the DNC, such as shared finances and leaked debate questions to Clinton from a CNN contributor, revealing donor-driven influences that prioritized party unity over impartiality.^[103] Critics, including former DNC interim chair Donna Brazile, contended that the emphasis on Russian attribution deflected scrutiny from these domestic failings, allowing narratives of external meddling to overshadow verifiable elite capture and institutional biases within the party.^[104] This framing, amplified by mainstream outlets amid acknowledged left-leaning institutional predispositions, arguably minimized accountability for internal corruptions in favor of unquantified foreign causation claims. The leaks correlated with accelerated institutional distrust, as Gallup polls recorded a plunge in media trust to 32% in 2016—the lowest since 1976—reflecting public prioritization of disclosed domestic irregularities over speculative interference effects.^[105] Causal analysis favors the emails' content as the primary driver of voter perceptions, given their empirical verifiability against the ICA's higher-confidence but outcome-indeterminate assessments.^[7]

References

[1]
The Podesta Emails - WikiLeaks
WikiLeaks series on deals involving Hillary Clinton campaign Chairman John Podesta. Mr Podesta is a long-term associate of the Clintons.Hillary Clinton · Pizza · 58660 results, viewing 1 to 50
[2]
The John Podesta emails released by WikiLeaks - CBS News
Jun 25, 2024 · Katiana Krawchenko, Donald Judd, Nancy Cordes, Julianna Goldman, Reena Flores, Rebecca Shabad, Emily Schultheis, Alexander Romano, ...
[3]
Here's how hackers stole 50,000 of John Podesta's emails
Oct 29, 2016 · Here's how hackers stole 50,000 of John Podesta's emails. By ... tens of thousands of emails from Podesta's accounts that have now been posted ...
[4]
WikiLeaks Releases Alleged Clinton Wall Street Speeches In Batch ...
Oct 8, 2016 · The controversial whistleblower organization WikiLeaks on Friday released emails that they say are linked to Hillary Clinton campaign ...Missing: facts | Show results with:facts
[5]
WikiLeaks emails: what they revealed about the Clinton campaign's ...
Nov 6, 2016 · Tens of thousands of emails hacked from campaign chairman John Podesta's account have provided an unprecedented window into a presidential ...
[6]
18 revelations from Wikileaks' hacked Clinton emails - BBC News
Oct 27, 2016 · Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta, whose emails were hacked, has claimed the Russian government was behind the leak and the Trump campaign knew about it ...
[7]
[PDF] Background to “Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions in ...
Jan 6, 2017 · This report includes an analytic assessment drafted and coordinated among The Central Intelligence. Agency (CIA), The Federal Bureau of ...Missing: Podesta Fancy Bear
[8]
[PDF] Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 ...
Mar 7, 2019 · ... emails stolen from the Podesta email account. In total, WikiLeaks released 33 trnnches ofstolen emails between October 7, 2016 and. November ...
[9]
How Should NPR Report On Hacked WikiLeaks Emails?
Oct 19, 2016 · The Clinton campaign has not confirmed that the hacked emails are real and NPR has not been able to confirm their authenticity.<|separator|>
[10]
Bridgegate, Pizzagate and storytelling on the web - PubMed Central
Jun 16, 2020 · For example, in the Pizzagate conspiracy theory, based on an inventive reading of John Podesta's emails hacked from the DNC servers, Hillary ...
[11]
Mueller's timeline: How the Russian hacks unfolded - POLITICO
Jul 13, 2018 · The timeline begins on March 19, 2016, when the Russian hackers sent John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, a “spearphishing” email.
[12]
Mueller Report details how long national nightmare started with ...
Apr 26, 2019 · ... spear-phishing attack. Cybersecurity professionals should not only study how these attacks were conducted, but they should also use them to ...
[13]
The phishing email that hacked the account of John Podesta
Oct 28, 2016 · March 2016. This appears to be the phishing email that hacked Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's Gmail account. Further, The Clinton ...
[14]
How one typo helped let Russian hackers in | CNN Politics
Jun 27, 2017 · ... 2016 campaign. “The rest,” Podesta said, “is history.” That fake Gmail alert was one of a series of cyber intrusions that US intelligence ...
[15]
Is this the email that hacked John Podesta's account? | CNN Politics
Oct 30, 2016 · SecureWorks has linked the bit.ly account used in the Podesta phishing attack to “Fancy Bear.” WikiLeaks has denied working with the ...Missing: details | Show results with:details
[16]
How Hackers Broke Into John Podesta and Colin Powell's Gmail ...
Oct 20, 2016 · All these hacks were done using the same tool: malicious short URLs hidden in fake Gmail messages. And those URLs, according to a security ...
[17]
Top Democrat's emails hacked by Russia after aide made typo ...
Dec 14, 2016 · In the run-up to the US election, aide to John Podesta spotted phishing email but flagged it as 'legitimate' instead of 'illegitimate'
[18]
How John Podesta's Emails Were Hacked And How To Prevent It ...
Oct 21, 2016 · Fancy Bear used a spear-phishing campaign to attack their victims. Phishing, spear phishing and the Podesta hack. Phishing scams try to trick ...Missing: March | Show results with:March
[19]
Grand Jury Indicts 12 Russian Intelligence Officers for Hacking ...
Jul 13, 2018 · The indictment charges twelve Russian nationals for committing federal crimes that were intended to interfere with the 2016 US presidential election.Missing: Assessment January 2017 Podesta attribution
[20]
Does the U.S. government really know who hacked Democrats ...
Oct 26, 2016 · The hacking and public release of Democratic campaign and committee emails made the news and a presidential debate, with more leaks expected to come.
[21]
Here's the Public Evidence Russia Hacked the DNC — It's Not Enough
Dec 14, 2016 · ... hacked emails and documents. Some of the malware found on DNC computers is believed to be the same as that used by two hacking groups ...
[22]
Mueller Ignored Findings Of Former Intel Officials On DNC Emails
Apr 19, 2019 · The Mueller report on alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 election lacks evidence that Russian agents passed Clinton campaign emails to ...
[23]
How Podesta got hacked: HelpDesk said 'Password' phishing email ...
Oct 29, 2016 · Weak Password Test. Compliance training. Compliance Training ... Spear Phishing · CEO Fraud · Ransomware · Multi-Factor Authentication · Take ...
[24]
The fast-spreading lie about John Podesta's hacked email password
Jan 5, 2017 · If Podesta did use the ultimate in weak passwords, that's an ... His email was breached because hackers sent a spear phishing email ...
[25]
How the Russians hacked the DNC and passed its emails to ...
Jul 13, 2018 · Mueller III indicted 12 Russian military officers Friday for hacking Democrats. ... Emails hacked from Podesta's account would be released on ...
[26]
WikiLeaks' Assange denies Russia behind Podesta hack - POLITICO
Nov 3, 2016 · Julian Assange is denying that the Russian government is the source of WikiLeaks' trove of hacked emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman.
[27]
Julian Assange: Russia Isn't Giving WikiLeaks Clinton's Hacked ...
Nov 3, 2016 · In a statement Thursday, Assange said Wikileaks' sources of the emails “are not state parties.” It does not say how it obtained the documents, ...
[28]
https://fortune.com/2016/11/03/julian-assange-wikileaks-russia-podesta-emails/
[29]
The most revealing Clinton campaign emails in WikiLeaks release
Oct 7, 2016 · WikiLeaks released a trove of emails apparently hacked from Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman email account, unleashing thousands of messages.Missing: DCLeaks | Show results with:DCLeaks
[30]
Algorithms and agenda-setting in Wikileaks' #Podestaemails release
In the month before the 2016 U.S. Presidential election, Wikileaks released 37 serialized batches of e-mails authored by former Clinton campaign manager ...
[31]
WikiLeaks posts more John Podesta emails | CNN Politics
Oct 10, 2016 · WikiLeaks Monday morning posted an additional 2000 emails that appear to be from the account of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, ...
[32]
WikiLeaks Releases More Purported Podesta Emails, Bringing Total ...
Oct 15, 2016 · The latest batch from WikiLeaks of hacked emails linked to Clinton campaign chair John Podesta brings the total to more than 11000 of what ...
[33]
Verifying Wikileaks DKIM-Signatures - Solsticlipse
Oct 21, 2016 · Are Wikileaks emails doctored? I've heard claims that emails released by Wikileaks have been doctored. I decided to try to try to test this.
[34]
http://solsticlipse.com/2016/10/21/Verifying-Wikileaks-DKIM-Signatures.html
[35]
Are the Clinton WikiLeaks emails doctored, or are they authentic?
Oct 23, 2016 · Hillary Clinton and her campaign have sought to cast doubt on the authenticity of thousands of emails leaked by WikiLeak.
[36]
The Fake Podesta Email That's Still Circulating - FactCheck.org
Sep 17, 2018 · Q: Did WikiLeaks release an email showing that Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign bribed prominent Republicans to oppose Donald Trump ...
[37]
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/09/the-fake-podesta-email-thats-still-circulating/
[38]
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/36751
[39]
DNC head leaked debate question to Clinton, Podesta emails ...
Oct 31, 2016 · Donna Brazile tipped off Clinton's campaign about Flint water crisis question, according to new emails released by WikiLeaks from John Podesta's account.
[40]
CNN Parts Ways With Donna Brazile, a Hillary Clinton Supporter
Oct 31, 2016 · CNN has severed ties with the Democratic strategist Donna Brazile, after hacked emails from WikiLeaks showed that she shared questions for CNN-sponsored ...
[41]
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/us/politics/donna-brazile-wikileaks-cnn.html
[42]
Inside Hillary Clinton's Secret Takeover of the DNC - Politico
Nov 2, 2017 · When I was asked to run the Democratic Party after the Russians hacked our emails, I stumbled onto a shocking truth about the Clinton campaign.Missing: pre- Podesta
[43]
Hillary Clinton Acknowledges Saudi Terror Financing in Hacked ...
Oct 12, 2016 · ... Podesta shows the Democratic presidential nominee believes Saudi Arabia is funding radical groups ... ISIS to the Saudi government. It seems that ...Missing: Foundation | Show results with:Foundation
[44]
Trump demands Clinton Foundation return $25 million from Saudis
Jun 13, 2016 · Donald Trump on Monday demanded that Hillary Clinton return $25 million the Clinton Foundation reportedly received from Saudi Arabia.
[45]
Foundation Ties Bedevil Hillary Clinton's Presidential Campaign
Aug 20, 2016 · The Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation thrived largely on the generosity of foreign donors and individuals who gave hundreds of millions of dollars ...
[46]
Fwd: Formal response from me - WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails
This means that to the extent anyone were to claim that the Uranium One sale might have raised national security questions, agencies such as the Department of ...
[47]
WikiLeaks releases alleged Podesta emails - The Hill
Oct 7, 2016 · The Clinton campaign chairman's emails involve the U.S.'s 2010 decision to sell a uranium company to Russia.
[48]
Memo reveals interplay between Clinton Foundation, personal ...
Oct 26, 2016 · A 12-page memo shows the links between an aide's business, the foundation, and the Clintons.
[49]
WikiLeaks reveals Hillary-world vexed by 'Bill Clinton Inc.' - CNN
Oct 28, 2016 · A handful of the emails and documents hacked from the private email account of Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta, ...
[50]
WikiLeaks Emails Show Hillary Clinton Made Deal With Morocco
Oct 22, 2016 · Why the WikiLeaks revelation about a “pay-to-play” deal with Morocco is a quintessential Clinton controversy.
[51]
Donations to Foundation Vexed Hillary Clinton's Aides, Emails Show
Oct 26, 2016 · Her top aides expressed profound concerns in internal emails about how foreign donations to the Clinton Foundation and Bill Clinton's own moneymaking ventures ...
[52]
No Consequences for Reporters Caught Colluding with Hillary
Oct 24, 2016 · CLEVELAND, OH - JULY 20: Politico reporter Glenn Thrush talks with Julie Mason while Politico reporter Glenn Thrush. Decades before social media ...
[53]
Sorry not sorry: Politico's Thrush doubles down on Podesta emails
you be the ...
[54]
EXCLUSIVE: New Leak on Clinton's Cozy Press Relationship
Oct 9, 2016 · Internal strategy documents and emails among Clinton staffers shed light on friendly and highly useful relationships between the campaign and various members ...<|separator|>
[55]
WikiLeaks reveals Hillary Clinton camp's work with 'VERY friendly ...
Oct 21, 2016 · A new thread from Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's leaked emails ... Maggie Haberman (now with The New York Times) “safe.” “As ...
[56]
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/oct/21/wikileaks-reveals-hillary-clinton-camps-work-with-/
[57]
Hillary Not Truthful About Wall Street Speaking Fees - HuffPost
Feb 8, 2016 · Hillary is veering from the truth when she suggests her $225000 per speech fee, paid three times by Goldman Sachs, was "what they offered.
[58]
Questions on Speeches to Goldman Sachs Vex Hillary Clinton
Feb 4, 2016 · With rivals pouncing on her ties to corporate America, experts say Mrs. Clinton needs to justify accepting speaking fees as high as $225000.Missing: 2013-2015 | Show results with:2013-2015<|control11|><|separator|>
[59]
Hacked 80-page roundup of paid speeches shows Clinton 'praising ...
Oct 12, 2016 · WikiLeaks' trove of hacked emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's Gmail account includes an 80-page attachment seemingly from the Harry Walker ...
[60]
Hillary Clinton Made $2.9M From 12 Speeches to Big Banks
Jan 8, 2016 · Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders assailed Clinton for taking large speaking fees from Wall Street since leaving the State ...Missing: $225000 | Show results with:$225000
[61]
Leaked Speech Excerpts Show a Hillary Clinton at Ease With Wall ...
Oct 7, 2016 · In lucrative paid speeches that Hillary Clinton delivered to elite financial firms but refused to disclose to the public, she displayed an easy comfort with ...
[62]
Email leaks show Hillary Clinton as pro-free trade | Elections News
Oct 8, 2016 · Wikileaks has published leaked emails from Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton, which could damage her bid to become president.Missing: deregulation | Show results with:deregulation
[63]
WikiLeaks posts apparent excerpts of Clinton Wall Street speeches
Oct 7, 2016 · ... faked.” The Clinton campaign declined to confirm whether the emails were Podesta's. Podesta tweet-storms about the hack and seemingly ...Missing: VP shortlist
[64]
Leaked emails show what Clinton told executives in private - PBS
Oct 8, 2016 · The WikiLeaks organization on Friday posted what it said were thousands of emails obtained in a hack of the Clinton campaign chairman's personal email account.Missing: deregulation | Show results with:deregulation
[65]
Excerpts of Clinton's Paid Speeches to Goldman Sachs Leaked
Oct 7, 2016 · The excerpts, posted by WikiLeaks, appear in an internal campaign email that highlighted the most politically damaging quotes from each paid ...
[66]
Podesta emails show excerpts of Clinton speeches to Goldman
Oct 7, 2016 · New trove of hacked emails reveal Clinton campaign was concerned about specific speeches to Wall Street bank.
[67]
Podesta won't say whether hacked speech excerpts are authentic
Oct 9, 2016 · Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta is still refusing to say whether excerpts of Clinton's paid speeches that turned up in a trove of his ...Missing: advising transcripts
[68]
Emails give new detail about Mercury, Podesta role in Manafort's ...
Sep 13, 2018 · The documents suggest Tony Podesta, the chairman of the Podesta Group, and former Rep. Vin Weber (R-Minn.), a top lobbyist at Mercury, knew that ...Missing: elite networks
[69]
More details on Podesta Group's final days - POLITICO
The disclosure shows that lobbying for the Podesta Group's foreign clients ground to a halt around the time Paul Manafort and Rick Gates were ...
[70]
Re: opening for a Catholic Spring? just musing - WikiLeaks
... Catholic church. Is contraceptive coverage an issue around which that could > happen. The Bishops will undoubtedly continue the fight. Does the Catholic ...Missing: reform | Show results with:reform
[71]
https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/16557
[72]
Re: Risotto - WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails
The slower add process and stirring causes the rice to give up it's starch which gives the risotto it's creamy consistency.
[73]
Clinton campaign dubs WikiLeaks 'Russian propaganda' after latest ...
Oct 11, 2016 · Hillary Clinton's campaign fired back on Tuesday as WikiLeaks released a new tranche of hacked emails from the account of its chairman, John Podesta.
[74]
Joint Statement from the Department Of Homeland Security and ...
Oct 7, 2016 · The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident that the Russian Government directed the recent compromises of e-mails from US persons ...
[75]
FBI investigates cyberattack of Democratic National Committee - PBS
Jul 25, 2016 · In a statement Monday, the FBI said it was investigating a "cyber intrusion" affecting the DNC and was "working to determine the nature and ...
[76]
CNN fact-checks Donald Trump's attacks on Hillary Clinton
Jun 22, 2016 · Even Schweizer admits there's no smoking gun. According to The New York Times, although significant donors to the foundation stood to ...
[77]
Opinion | WikiLeaks Isn't Whistleblowing - The New York Times
Nov 4, 2016 · “Wait,” you might think. John Podesta is about as far from dissident politics as you can get. These leaks have produced genuine news. We finally ...Missing: alternative | Show results with:alternative
[78]
Inside story: How Russia hacked the Democrats' emails and Putin's ...
But the anatomy of how that hack occurred had never been revealed, until now. That investigative story, by Raphael Satter, Justin Myers, Jeff Donn and Chad Day, ...Missing: coverage | Show results with:coverage
[79]
[PDF] Report on the Investigation into Russian Interference in the 2016 ...
Jan 26, 2018 · The Russian government interfered in the 2016 presidential election in sweeping and systematic fashion. Evidence of Russian government ...<|separator|>
[80]
John Podesta Archives - FactCheck.org
The Fake Podesta Email That's Still Circulating ... Q: Did WikiLeaks release an email showing that Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign bribed prominent ...Missing: VP shortlist<|separator|>
[81]
Latest Fact-checksJohn Podesta - PolitiFact
Stand up for the facts! Our only agenda is to publish the truth so you can be an informed participant in democracy.
[82]
Forget the FBI cache; the Podesta emails show how America is run
Oct 31, 2016 · WikiLeaks' dump of messages to and from Clinton's campaign chief offer an unprecedented view into the workings of the elite, and how it looks after itself.
[83]
Partisanship, Propaganda, and Disinformation: Online Media and ...
Aug 16, 2017 · In this study, we analyze both mainstream and social media coverage of the 2016 United States presidential election.Missing: percentage | Show results with:percentage
[84]
WikiLeaks and the Oily Washington Press - POLITICO Magazine
Oct 18, 2016 · A bunch of reporters got caught up in the Podesta flypaper. How bad is it, really?Missing: coordination friendly
[85]
Leaked Emails Appear to Reveal Contents of Clinton's Wall Street ...
Oct 7, 2016 · The emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's gmail account, which were released on WikiLeaks, could give Trump fresh ammunition.Missing: facts | Show results with:facts
[86]
Trump says WikiLeaks email shows collusion between Clinton, DOJ
Oct 11, 2016 · Trump seized on hacked emails released by Wikileaks that purport to show Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon communicating with the DOJ regarding a FOIA lawsuit.Missing: utilization | Show results with:utilization
[87]
Trump Twists Facts on WikiLeaks - FactCheck.org
Oct 12, 2016 · Donald Trump cited apparent excerpts from Hillary Clinton's past closed-door speeches, contained in emails leaked by WikiLeaks, but he twisted those excerpts ...
[88]
Trump accuses Clinton of 'pay for play' in Morocco | CNN Politics
Oct 21, 2016 · Donald Trump on Friday accused his rival Hillary Clinton of engaging in “pay for play” for accepting an invitation to speak at a Clinton ...Missing: citing | Show results with:citing
[89]
Wikileaks Reveals Long List of Media Canoodling with Hillary Clinton
Oct 14, 2016 · There is a reason that the establishment media is devoting so little airtime to the Wikileaks revelations: the hacked emails show how many ...Missing: database | Show results with:database
[90]
WikiLeaks Reveals Podesta's Obsession with Aliens... Space Aliens!
Oct 11, 2016 · The recent dump by WikiLeaks of hacked emails from the chairman of Hillary R. Clinton's presidential campaign chairman exposed John ...Missing: database | Show results with:database
[91]
Trump: 'We're winning' in the real polls - POLITICO
Oct 24, 2016 · Trump seized on the WikiLeaks hack of Hillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta at his latest rally Monday in St. Augustine, Florida, to ...
[92]
Trump campaign planned for WikiLeaks dump, tried to acquire ...
Apr 18, 2019 · Members of the 2016 Trump campaign had a series of contacts with WikiLeaks regarding leaked Clinton campaign emails, even preparing a press ...
[93]
How Much Did WikiLeaks Hurt Hillary Clinton? | FiveThirtyEight
Dec 23, 2016 · How did Hillary Clinton blow a 7-percentage-point lead over Donald Trump in the final month of the campaign? Much of the post-election ...
[94]
Polls show battleground map tightening - POLITICO
Oct 30, 2016 · New polls released Sunday in key battleground states suggest Hillary Clinton's once-decisive advantage in the Electoral College is narrowing ...
[95]
https://www.politico.com/story/2016/10/battleground-polls-clinton-trump-230507
[96]
Donald Trump Finds Improbable Ally in WikiLeaks
Oct 12, 2016 · Donald J. Trump is suddenly embracing an unlikely ally: The document-spilling group WikiLeaks, which Republicans denounced when it published classified State ...
[97]
[PDF] (u)report - Senate Select Committee on Intelligence |
... Hack and Leak ... GRU Hacking Activities ...... '. ...................................................... 174. (U) The GRU Plans and Executes the Theft ...Missing: evidentiary | Show results with:evidentiary
[98]
[PDF] Report on Matters Related to Intelligence Activities and ...
May 12, 2023 · 409 The email included a summary of the contents of the Clinton Plan intelligence.410 The Office did not identify any replies or follow-up ...
[99]
Wisconsin and Pennsylvania Certify Trump Victory After Recount Effort
Dec 12, 2016 · A statewide recount in Wisconsin reaffirmed Donald Trump's victory there and showed little difference from the original vote count, ...Missing: results flip
[100]
Jill Stein's election recount ends as Wisconsin finds 131 more Trump ...
Dec 12, 2016 · US presidential elections are determined not by the overall national popular vote but by the electoral college, which awards votes based on the ...
[101]
Released Emails Suggest the D.N.C. Derided the Sanders Campaign
Jul 22, 2016 · Top officials at the Democratic National Committee criticized and mocked Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont during the primary campaign.Missing: superdelegates strategy
[102]
Leaked DNC emails reveal details of anti-Sanders sentiment
Jul 23, 2016 · Days before convention, cache of 19000 emails released and several show officials scoffing at Hillary Clinton's former rival and questioning ...Missing: statement | Show results with:statement
[103]
Breaking: DNC Chief Donna Brazile Leaked Sanders Info to Clinton ...
Oct 10, 2016 · WikiLeaks hack reveals DNC's favoritism as Clinton staff in damage control over Hillary's support for DOMA.
[104]
Americans' Trust in Media Remains at Trend Low - Gallup News
Oct 14, 2024 · After dropping precipitously to the trend low of 51% in 2016, Democrats' trust in the media ranged from 68% to 76% between 2017 and 2022 but ...