Letters to the Editor: Fine, subpoena Trump. Just don’t expect to learn anything. (June 7)
The president has been in office for a year, and he has done enough to warrant a subpoena. The problem is that, in his haste to learn more from his enemies, he’s not allowed to take anything useful. Just take that New York Times piece about WikiLeaks — without so much as a footnote to explain why the paper was withholding the report from its readers.
Withholding it until after the election, in other words, and then waiting until after Trump was inaugurated to disclose it.
That’s a pretty good example of “let sleeping dogs lie.”
In reality, there is a lot to be learned from the New York Times story about WikiLeaks’ dealings with the Trump campaign.
For one thing, the most valuable information is buried in the bottom corner, buried in the last four sentences. That’s when the Times reports that “WikiLeaks had not made contact with any of the Trump campaign advisers.”
That’s not true. A week before the Times report, Trump Jr. called WikiLeaks to discuss the forthcoming release of Hillary Clinton emails.
WikiLeaks did not contact the Trump campaign, however. And WikiLeaks, by the way, has always released its email dumps before Trump’s election. Trump is just the latest one to have received the data.
The Times story goes on to say that “WikiLeaks did not discuss any meeting with members of the Trump campaign.”
This is also false.
First, let’s set the facts straight. I saw an email that WikiLeaks sent to Trump Jr. in April, with the subject “NYC and DNC emails,” and I can attest that WikiLeaks’s release of stolen Democratic emails was in response to the New York Times report.
The email said, “The upcoming release of emails will be a game changer for the campaign. As you know, we’ve already received the DNC emails from the candidate. We’ll be releasing Podesta’s to the press tomorrow evening.”
That email was sent on April 1, and was forwarded — on April 8 to Trump Jr.
