676
submitted 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Politico reports that it was sent communications from inside the Trump campaign, including Sen. J.D. Vance’s (R-OH) 271-page vetting file, allegedly by an Iranian hacker.

The outlet said that it has been receiving anonymous emails containing internal communications from the Trump campaign. The campaign acknowledged the authenticity of the communications on Saturday, accusing “foreign sources hostile to the United States,” for leaking them.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] 7U5K3N@lemmy.dbzer0.com 16 points 3 months ago

Does anyone have it? For download?

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] Snapz@lemmy.world 15 points 3 months ago

Why is politico talking "around" the documents? Are they releasing or consider release?

[-] pastabatman@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

The document was sent to Politico from an AOL.com account with the name "Robert" lmao

[-] RizzRustbolt@lemmy.world 14 points 3 months ago

I garauntee you that all this was leaked by one of the thousands of folks that thought they were going to be paid and weren't.

[-] Doom@ttrpg.network 13 points 3 months ago

bUt hiS eMAiLs

[-] danfromwv@lemmy.sdf.org 12 points 3 months ago

Iran, if you're listening.....

[-] RangerJosie@sffa.community 10 points 3 months ago

Release it. Release it all. Let the public decide.

[-] twistypencil@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

I want proof it was iran, headline said it was, but then first sentence says allegedly

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Got_Bent@lemmy.world 9 points 3 months ago

270 pages? Did each page have a single capital letter and a colorful picture of trump?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social 8 points 3 months ago

Hey, anybody remember the scandal around Dubya's Texas Air National Guard record? Somebody leaked a document to Dan Rather, and the Bush campaign even acknowledged that the information in it was 100% accurate. But it wasn't the original document. Forensic analysis showed that it had been re-created in MS Word.

Then, the Bushies made it all about the forgery, which cost Rather his job, and sent the damaging information about Bush down the memory hole.

Remember that? I'm not saying that the DonOld's campaign is pulling that trick, but IRAN IRAN IRAN!!!1!

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago

Has Politico published what is in it?

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›
this post was submitted on 10 Aug 2024
676 points (97.9% liked)

politics

19120 readers
2114 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS