3 ms·
Even if the scenario you describe is true (and there is no proof of that so this is purely a thought excersise), would you rather the Clinton emails weren’t rel
by malvosenior 9y ago
Even if the scenario you describe is true (and there is no proof of that so this is purely a thought excersise), would you rather the Clinton emails weren’t released at all? Was there nothing to gain by learning that Clinton and the DNC worked against Sanders? That they had direct access to a very supportive media? At least we know that now.
- karmajunkie 9y agoThere's not a good answer for that. Given hindsight and the knowledge that releasing them contributed directly to the election of Trump, yes, I'd say that I'd rather that they had not been released. If the opposing candidate had been a sane Republican the calculus might be a little different. However, I think its self-deception of the highest order if you think either Wikileaks or the supplier of the Clinton emails is not also sitting on a great deal of incriminating evidence from the Trump campaign and/or the RNC.
- malvosenior 9y agoMy values are consistent regardless of who is involved. More information is always better. I also don’t think it’s worth speculating on what information WL may have. That they exist at all is a huge service, that they’re not releasing the kind of information you imagine exists (and happens to help your political goals) doesn’t make the info they do release any less valuable.