6 ms·

Russia Is Reportedly Set to Release Clinton's Intercepted Emails

59 points by aburan28 10y ago

danielvf 10y ago
Trump made his debut foreign policy speech at a pro-Russian Washington think tank. Several Trump advisors have worked with Russia before. In the other hand, the Clintons have been involved in scandals over mass dark Chinese money, and Hillary has taken in millions from Saudia Arabia and Kuwait in recent years. Given that Russia fears China and is currently invoved in a war with Saudia Arabian proxies, it's pretty much a no brainier which candidate they will supporting.
- dogma1138 10y ago
  It's also no brainier if they want to derail the standing of the US in the international community, if only 10% of what trump says on a daily basis will be said during his presidency he can do allot of damage. I some how doubt that many world leaders would take him seriously, at this point I'm hoping for a spoiler from both parties because I cannot remember a lower point in US politics than this election.
  - NigelWallacy 10y ago
    Okay, so how is this a response to the parent's comment? The parent said that Trump announced his foreign policy position at a pro-russian think tank and that he has a few aids who worked with the russians, and that the russians may release the emails to favour trump. and your response to that is?
    - nickspacek 10y ago
      He's (maybe) saying the Russians would also support Trump for the benefit of causing America to lose face on the world stage.
    - dhimes 10y ago
      Replace the comma between "community" and "if" with a period and it reads better.
  - dhimes 10y ago
    Time to draft Mark Cuban or somebody. Maybe we can shine a light in the sky or something.
- bruceb 10y ago
  >Hillary has taken in millions from Saudia Arabia and Kuwait >in recent years. There is no actual proof of this. One doesn't have to be a Hillary supporter just want some kind of proof of accusations
  - NigelWallacy 10y ago
    >Kingdom of Saudi Arabia >between 10,000,000 to 25,000,000 https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors?category=%2410%2C000%2C001+to+%2425%2C000%2C000 https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors?category=%241... >"No actual proof" ok...
    - andrewl 10y ago
      While I'm sure that a donation (especially a gigantic one) to the Clinton Foundation will help make the Clintons like you, it's not as though the Saudis gave the money to Hillary herself, or to her campaign. It went to the Clinton Foundation, whose work you can see in the Our Work menu at the top of that page.
      - tyingq 10y ago
        There are ways to be creative about funneling money around. http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/ http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-founda... An excerpt: "The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends."
        whamlastxmas 10y ago
        Exactly. The money is mostly spent on non-charitable things. For example, HTC needs a private jet to Ohio for a campaign speech. No problem, make a 5 minute speech while in Ohio for the foundation and you can expense it all to the foundation. Or have a huge staff who do fuck all for the foundation and spend 95% of their time on campaign work.
- VLM 10y ago
  Consider that after HRC and Russia's "worlds goofiest reset button ceremony" around 2009 or so, things have gone sharply downhill for US/Russian relations. From argumentative brothers to something near "the shooting war begins the day after Hillary's inauguration". The analogy of the changing relationship between the USA and Iran in the Carter administration is enlightening. Its hard for HRC to deflect that to her boss. If she had stayed a senator or otherwise somehow not been involved, maybe the Russians wouldn't be so unhappy with her. She has been at the center of the last couple years of the USA/Russia trainwreck. However its not totally impossible to deflect that to her boss. Her husband did "OK" with yelsin and met putin right at the end of his term. So she can likely argue its nothing personal or familial, its all an obama problem. And the Russians can turn right around and ask if she failed to advise her boss properly or failed to resign for ethical reasons, either way they have no reason to let her off the hook, unless she does something for them, maybe. Trump being a businessman and a dealmaker and an outsider is almost certainly a better situation for Russia. He's stable and much more non-interventionist than Hillary. Its hard not to see how that would measurably benefit Russia (and, frankly, the USA) More philosophically, lifetime politicians bend toward monopoly outlook, and american businessmen bend toward competition. A lifelong politician is going to inherently have an issue with the concept of a competing empire existing. A businessman isn't going to mind a competing land empire on the other side of the planet separated by a vast ocean full of our own navy. He's not going to be existentially scared of Russia. Scared people lash out, and that's dangerous with nuclear powers. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the above arguments, but nobody else is bringing it up, so here it is.
  - NigelWallacy 10y ago
    China, even with Trump's talk of tariffs, seems to take a preferential view on his foreign policy for the same reasons you stated that Russia might hold. There seems to be an appetite abroad for a non-interventionist US foreign policy.
  - nobody_nowhere 10y ago
    > He's stable That's a novel argument
- scient 10y ago
  Working with Russia isn't something you should be excited about. Trump is delusional about Russia, as were (and still are) several of the European leaders. Russia is not looking for friendly relationships, they don't care about stupid resets etc. Its a backwards country, it will be for decades to come, and it trickles all the way down to the mindset of their people. They should be isolated even more, not courted for friendly relationships by an unexperienced president, so they could abuse that to their own good again.
  - witty_username 10y ago
    How is Russia a backwards country? Their HDI is pretty good (although perhaps not as good as other superpowers) and also they were in space race.
    - golergka 10y ago
      Have you been followong the news for the last five years? I lived there almost all my life, have a lot of family and friends there, and agree with parent comment wholeheartedly: modern russian political elite is a backwards and corrupt authoritarian that sincerely hate western and liberal values and do all in their power to turn the country back to totalitarian state. Their ambition in foreign policy is to be a feared bully, and best reaction US and West can come up with is more sanctions and isolation.
tim333 10y ago
Seems pretty dubious: >The claim appears to be based off nearly identical reports released last month, most notably by frontpagemag.com, that cited a website known for fake content as proof of the Russians’ intentions. http://www.infowars.com/debunked-no-russia-is-not-about-to-release-hillarys-emails/ http://www.infowars.com/debunked-no-russia-is-not-about-to-r...
- aburan28 10y ago
  Using infowars.com as a source to debunk a claim made by several news outlets is quite interesting
  - tim333 10y ago
    Yeah, maybe not the best source. Though talking of sources, the Daily Mail for example gives oilprice.com as it's source which says amongst other stuff: >The apparent message from Moscow, through the intelligence community, seemed to indicate frustration with the pace of the official U.S. Department of Justice investigation into the so-called server scandal... which seems kind of iffy to me. Like Putin is really concerned with the DOJ investigation into Hillary and that is what leaks to the west rather than say their dealings with Ukraine or Turkey. Sounds more like some US based right winger to me.
  - davidgerard 10y ago
    This is the sort of thing Sorcha Faal puts out regularly. Sorcha fucking Faal. Via the neo-Nazi site European Union Times. This was too bogus even for Infowars.
kukx 10y ago
It feels like a red herring to me. It may not be, but still, after the recent massacre the sentiment supports Trump. Hillary probably wants to change the subject - it may prove difficult.
- ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
  The most recent poll I saw (Hillary ahead of Trump by 12) differs.
- dragonwriter 10y ago
  Concrete evidence that"the sentiment supports Trump" after Orlando is found...where, exactly?
  - kukx 10y ago
    I think this Bloomberg poll may be some concrete indicator: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-14/bloomberg-politics-national-poll-june-2016 http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-14/bloomb...
    - dragonwriter 10y ago
      I don't see anything in that poll that indicates that the more is with Trump after Orlando.
tednoob 10y ago
Why would Russia release anything until the DMC have chosen Clinton as their candidate? I think that if Russia actually prefer Trump they would not release anything that would benefit Sanders in his struggle against Clinton.
- JoachimS 10y ago
  To get Clinton out of the race? DMC will have a candidate, the question is who? And if you support Trump (for your own end) which one would be best. Do you think Clinton or Sanders would have a bigger chans of winning against Trump?
  - tzs 10y ago
    > Do you think Clinton or Sanders would have a bigger chans of winning against Trump? Sanders by a landslide, according to a bazillion polls by almost all major polling organizations throughout the entire campaign. Generally, the polling has indicated the following: • Sanders beats every GOP contender by a big margin. • Clinton beats most, by a small margin, and loses to Kasich.
- spriggan3 10y ago
  > Reliable intelligence sources in the West What sources ? it's too easy to begin an article like that without even telling where the information comes. > By Defense & Foreign Affairs I guess it is them http://www.dfaonline.net/ http://www.dfaonline.net/ Doesn't look trustable to me. I didn't hear any Russian official saying they were going to release confidential communication from US officials.
- NigelWallacy 10y ago
  If russia does this, will it not damage Russia's standing globally? It is not like the FBI cannot get hillary's emails, which, correct me if I am wrong, they totally can. If russia does this, it would be a down right open and transparent attempt of influencing domestic issues and justice and due process.
  - 10y ago
_yosefk 10y ago
If Americans think this is released by Russia to harm Hillary, maybe they'll side with Hillary, at least more so than if it's released by Wikileaks, thought Hillary and started spreading rumors that the leak is coming from the Russians. "Reportedly..." "Reliable intelligence sources in the West have indicated..." Riiiiiight.
_1 10y ago
Every news outlet is citing oilprice.com. Has there been any other source for this?
rebolek 10y ago
Wow, this is total nonsense from Sorcha Faal. http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2048.htm http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2048.htm
oolongCat 10y ago
Yep, first they took over reddit, then imgur fell, now HN. I thought if I came to HN I could stay away from all the political noise. (While I have no problem with people talking about things that would effect every single one of us, I cant agree with the fact we at HN are upvoting an article about an article written by oilprice)
- danielvf 10y ago
  I agree with you that the article is so doubiously sourced as to be effectively worthless at the current time.
a3n 10y ago
Is this news or editorial. The URL says "news", but it's full of "reports say" and "sources say," without saying who those sources are saying to. Are the sources saying to the article's author, or to someone else in some other article at some other outlet, or what? From the byline, who is "Defense and Foreign Affairs," and who is "oil.com?"
aburan28 10y ago
Why was this flagged?
- detaro 10y ago
  I assume because there is no evidence or clear announcement whatsoever, just the claim that unspecific sources say that it is possible something might happen.

59 points by aburan28 10y ago

Trump made his debut foreign policy speech at a pro-Russian Washington think tank. Several Trump advisors have worked with Russia before. In the other hand, the Clintons have been involved in scandals over mass dark Chinese money, and Hillary has taken in millions from Saudia Arabia and Kuwait in recent years. Given that Russia fears China and is currently invoved in a war with Saudia Arabian proxies, it's pretty much a no brainier which candidate they will supporting.

dogma1138 10y ago
It's also no brainier if they want to derail the standing of the US in the international community, if only 10% of what trump says on a daily basis will be said during his presidency he can do allot of damage. I some how doubt that many world leaders would take him seriously, at this point I'm hoping for a spoiler from both parties because I cannot remember a lower point in US politics than this election.
- NigelWallacy 10y ago
  Okay, so how is this a response to the parent's comment? The parent said that Trump announced his foreign policy position at a pro-russian think tank and that he has a few aids who worked with the russians, and that the russians may release the emails to favour trump. and your response to that is?
  - nickspacek 10y ago
    He's (maybe) saying the Russians would also support Trump for the benefit of causing America to lose face on the world stage.
  - dhimes 10y ago
    Replace the comma between "community" and "if" with a period and it reads better.
- dhimes 10y ago
  Time to draft Mark Cuban or somebody. Maybe we can shine a light in the sky or something.
bruceb 10y ago
>Hillary has taken in millions from Saudia Arabia and Kuwait >in recent years. There is no actual proof of this. One doesn't have to be a Hillary supporter just want some kind of proof of accusations
- NigelWallacy 10y ago
  >Kingdom of Saudi Arabia >between 10,000,000 to 25,000,000 https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors?category=%2410%2C000%2C001+to+%2425%2C000%2C000 https://www.clintonfoundation.org/contributors?category=%241... >"No actual proof" ok...
  - andrewl 10y ago
    While I'm sure that a donation (especially a gigantic one) to the Clinton Foundation will help make the Clintons like you, it's not as though the Saudis gave the money to Hillary herself, or to her campaign. It went to the Clinton Foundation, whose work you can see in the Our Work menu at the top of that page.
    - tyingq 10y ago
      There are ways to be creative about funneling money around. http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-foundation-a-slush-fund/ http://nypost.com/2015/04/26/charity-watchdog-clinton-founda... An excerpt: "The Clinton family’s mega-charity took in more than $140 million in grants and pledges in 2013 but spent just $9 million on direct aid. The group spent the bulk of its windfall on administration, travel, and salaries and bonuses, with the fattest payouts going to family friends."
      - whamlastxmas 10y ago
        Exactly. The money is mostly spent on non-charitable things. For example, HTC needs a private jet to Ohio for a campaign speech. No problem, make a 5 minute speech while in Ohio for the foundation and you can expense it all to the foundation. Or have a huge staff who do fuck all for the foundation and spend 95% of their time on campaign work.
VLM 10y ago
Consider that after HRC and Russia's "worlds goofiest reset button ceremony" around 2009 or so, things have gone sharply downhill for US/Russian relations. From argumentative brothers to something near "the shooting war begins the day after Hillary's inauguration". The analogy of the changing relationship between the USA and Iran in the Carter administration is enlightening. Its hard for HRC to deflect that to her boss. If she had stayed a senator or otherwise somehow not been involved, maybe the Russians wouldn't be so unhappy with her. She has been at the center of the last couple years of the USA/Russia trainwreck. However its not totally impossible to deflect that to her boss. Her husband did "OK" with yelsin and met putin right at the end of his term. So she can likely argue its nothing personal or familial, its all an obama problem. And the Russians can turn right around and ask if she failed to advise her boss properly or failed to resign for ethical reasons, either way they have no reason to let her off the hook, unless she does something for them, maybe. Trump being a businessman and a dealmaker and an outsider is almost certainly a better situation for Russia. He's stable and much more non-interventionist than Hillary. Its hard not to see how that would measurably benefit Russia (and, frankly, the USA) More philosophically, lifetime politicians bend toward monopoly outlook, and american businessmen bend toward competition. A lifelong politician is going to inherently have an issue with the concept of a competing empire existing. A businessman isn't going to mind a competing land empire on the other side of the planet separated by a vast ocean full of our own navy. He's not going to be existentially scared of Russia. Scared people lash out, and that's dangerous with nuclear powers. I'm not entirely sure I agree with the above arguments, but nobody else is bringing it up, so here it is.
- NigelWallacy 10y ago
  China, even with Trump's talk of tariffs, seems to take a preferential view on his foreign policy for the same reasons you stated that Russia might hold. There seems to be an appetite abroad for a non-interventionist US foreign policy.
- nobody_nowhere 10y ago
  > He's stable That's a novel argument
scient 10y ago
Working with Russia isn't something you should be excited about. Trump is delusional about Russia, as were (and still are) several of the European leaders. Russia is not looking for friendly relationships, they don't care about stupid resets etc. Its a backwards country, it will be for decades to come, and it trickles all the way down to the mindset of their people. They should be isolated even more, not courted for friendly relationships by an unexperienced president, so they could abuse that to their own good again.
- witty_username 10y ago
  How is Russia a backwards country? Their HDI is pretty good (although perhaps not as good as other superpowers) and also they were in space race.
  - golergka 10y ago
    Have you been followong the news for the last five years? I lived there almost all my life, have a lot of family and friends there, and agree with parent comment wholeheartedly: modern russian political elite is a backwards and corrupt authoritarian that sincerely hate western and liberal values and do all in their power to turn the country back to totalitarian state. Their ambition in foreign policy is to be a feared bully, and best reaction US and West can come up with is more sanctions and isolation.

tim333 10y ago

Seems pretty dubious: >The claim appears to be based off nearly identical reports released last month, most notably by frontpagemag.com, that cited a website known for fake content as proof of the Russians’ intentions. http://www.infowars.com/debunked-no-russia-is-not-about-to-release-hillarys-emails/ http://www.infowars.com/debunked-no-russia-is-not-about-to-r...

aburan28 10y ago
Using infowars.com as a source to debunk a claim made by several news outlets is quite interesting
- tim333 10y ago
  Yeah, maybe not the best source. Though talking of sources, the Daily Mail for example gives oilprice.com as it's source which says amongst other stuff: >The apparent message from Moscow, through the intelligence community, seemed to indicate frustration with the pace of the official U.S. Department of Justice investigation into the so-called server scandal... which seems kind of iffy to me. Like Putin is really concerned with the DOJ investigation into Hillary and that is what leaks to the west rather than say their dealings with Ukraine or Turkey. Sounds more like some US based right winger to me.
- davidgerard 10y ago
  This is the sort of thing Sorcha Faal puts out regularly. Sorcha fucking Faal. Via the neo-Nazi site European Union Times. This was too bogus even for Infowars.

kukx 10y ago

It feels like a red herring to me. It may not be, but still, after the recent massacre the sentiment supports Trump. Hillary probably wants to change the subject - it may prove difficult.

ZanyProgrammer 10y ago
The most recent poll I saw (Hillary ahead of Trump by 12) differs.
dragonwriter 10y ago
Concrete evidence that"the sentiment supports Trump" after Orlando is found...where, exactly?
- kukx 10y ago
  I think this Bloomberg poll may be some concrete indicator: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-14/bloomberg-politics-national-poll-june-2016 http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2016-06-14/bloomb...
  - dragonwriter 10y ago
    I don't see anything in that poll that indicates that the more is with Trump after Orlando.

tednoob 10y ago

Why would Russia release anything until the DMC have chosen Clinton as their candidate? I think that if Russia actually prefer Trump they would not release anything that would benefit Sanders in his struggle against Clinton.

JoachimS 10y ago
To get Clinton out of the race? DMC will have a candidate, the question is who? And if you support Trump (for your own end) which one would be best. Do you think Clinton or Sanders would have a bigger chans of winning against Trump?
- tzs 10y ago
  > Do you think Clinton or Sanders would have a bigger chans of winning against Trump? Sanders by a landslide, according to a bazillion polls by almost all major polling organizations throughout the entire campaign. Generally, the polling has indicated the following: • Sanders beats every GOP contender by a big margin. • Clinton beats most, by a small margin, and loses to Kasich.
spriggan3 10y ago
> Reliable intelligence sources in the West What sources ? it's too easy to begin an article like that without even telling where the information comes. > By Defense & Foreign Affairs I guess it is them http://www.dfaonline.net/ http://www.dfaonline.net/ Doesn't look trustable to me. I didn't hear any Russian official saying they were going to release confidential communication from US officials.
NigelWallacy 10y ago
If russia does this, will it not damage Russia's standing globally? It is not like the FBI cannot get hillary's emails, which, correct me if I am wrong, they totally can. If russia does this, it would be a down right open and transparent attempt of influencing domestic issues and justice and due process.
- 10y ago

_yosefk 10y ago

If Americans think this is released by Russia to harm Hillary, maybe they'll side with Hillary, at least more so than if it's released by Wikileaks, thought Hillary and started spreading rumors that the leak is coming from the Russians. "Reportedly..." "Reliable intelligence sources in the West have indicated..." Riiiiiight.

_1 10y ago

Every news outlet is citing oilprice.com. Has there been any other source for this?

rebolek 10y ago

Wow, this is total nonsense from Sorcha Faal. http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2048.htm http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2048.htm

oolongCat 10y ago

Yep, first they took over reddit, then imgur fell, now HN. I thought if I came to HN I could stay away from all the political noise. (While I have no problem with people talking about things that would effect every single one of us, I cant agree with the fact we at HN are upvoting an article about an article written by oilprice)

danielvf 10y ago
I agree with you that the article is so doubiously sourced as to be effectively worthless at the current time.

a3n 10y ago

Is this news or editorial. The URL says "news", but it's full of "reports say" and "sources say," without saying who those sources are saying to. Are the sources saying to the article's author, or to someone else in some other article at some other outlet, or what? From the byline, who is "Defense and Foreign Affairs," and who is "oil.com?"

aburan28 10y ago

Why was this flagged?

detaro 10y ago
I assume because there is no evidence or clear announcement whatsoever, just the claim that unspecific sources say that it is possible something might happen.