The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not represent our advertisers

Thursday, April 26, 2018

Of Course The NY Times Should've Reported On The Hacked Clinton Emails

In an adapted excerpt of her new book "Chasing Hillary" published in the New York Times, the paper's political reporter Amy Chozick flirts with the idea that maybe the media never should have covered the hacked DNC and Clinton campaign emails during the 2016 election.

Here's how she describes the decision to cover the John Podesta emails the day they were published by WikiLeaks:

Editors and reporters huddled to discuss how to handle the emails. Everyone agreed that since the emails were already out there — and of importance to voters — it was The Times’s job to "confirm" and "contextualize" them. I didn’t argue that it appeared the emails were stolen by a hostile foreign government that had staged an attack on our electoral system. I didn’t push to hold off on publishing them until we could have a less harried discussion. I didn’t raise the possibility that we’d become puppets in Vladimir Putin’s master plan. I chose the byline.

Later when naming the mysterious and amorphous forces that in Clinton's view would "never allow" her to be president, Chozick cites herself:

They were Fake News drummed up by Vladimir Putin’s digital army. They were shadowy hackers who stole her campaign chairman’s emails hoping to weaken our democracy with Mr. Podesta’s risotto recipe. And they were The Times and me and all the other journalists who covered those stolen emails.



Anonymous said...

Build the wall out of her emails, no one can get over em

Anonymous said...

That's not even "What Happened".

His name was Seth Rich.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

Have seen more than enough reportage and excerpting of her heartrending diary. She's a mess and her 15 minutes are officially over!