By Aaron Miller-
In another round of revelations from hacked emails by Wikileaks, Hillary Clinton’s is again made to appear untrustworthy. The U.S have already accused the leaks as coming from Russia, having allegedly traced their source to Russian organisations.
One of the emails points to a series of internal conversations in May 2015 , in which training seems to be given about how to respond to a book by conservative author Peter Schweizer called “Clinton Cash,”. This book tracked donations to the Clinton Foundation, including speaking fees paid to former president Bill Clinton while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state.
Donations to the Clinton foundation has already been made public in past leakages by Wiki leaks, so not much new could come out in this area.
STRATEGIC
One email highlights strategic plans by Clinton communications director, Jennifer Palmieri to other Clinton staffers that Clinton had raised the topic of the book with her. “It was a difficult conversation,” Palmieri wrote. “My impression is she wants a much stronger response. Which means engaging more on details that we have to date not found in our interest to do so.”
The comments were taken from an email describing speech transcripts which Clinton has not voluntarily released despite requests to release them.
She obviously wanted to avoid the controversy that would come with it, but what Wikileaks intend to achieve from these revelations appear to be purely aimed a sabotaging her campaign. It is interesting how Wikileaks has not hacked or leaked anything from Donald Trump’s email. Wikileaks don’t seem to be actively against Trump, in the way they appear to be against Clinton
HACKED
Hacked from Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta, Bernie Sanders highlighting speech excerpts that could be potentially detrimental to Clinton’s political goals to win the elections.
Sanders had inquired what Clinton said to the financial institutions that paid her hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees, during the latter part of her tenure of Secretary of State.
It remains unclear what the big deal is if Clinton was indeed paid hundred of thousands in speaking fees- though this is an awful amount of money! Unless the suggestion is that it was illegal money being paid under the pretension of speaking fees, all it would show is that this was the fee they considered fit to pay her.
The problem here may be the question as to why anybody should be paid so much to speak when gold does not come out of the mouth of any human being. Wikileaks have good reason to wonder why Clinton was getting paid so much, but the process through which Wikileaks obtain their information is appalling.
Comments on hot election issues like Wall street regulation and free trade that feature in the leaked emails raise questions-questions that can only be answered by Clinton’s team, but which they may rather pass on.
The emails leaked by Wikileaks reveal Clinton describing her free-trade ambitions during a 2013 appearance before the U.S. arm of a Brazilian banking group. Records show the group, Itaú BBA USA Securities, paid her $225,000. Clinton was also paid £260,000 to address Deutsche bank in 2014. Why so much money for speeches?
STEALING
The hacked Democratic National Committee emails released over the summer has led U.S. intelligence officials on Friday to accuse Russia of stealing. Russia has denied the allegations, but they cannot be expected to admit it, can they? It does look suspect.
EXTORTIONATE
Clinton received extortionate amounts in speaking fees from major banks, particularly $675,000 by Goldman Sachs for three appearances.
However, it is comical, that on the same day as this intrusive release, Donald Trump was exposed in a newly released footage, showing him making lewd comments about women.
Following the embarrassment of the revelation, Trump apologised to ”any one who may have been offended” instead of apologising categorically for the lewd comments which present him as being unfit for president. Trump’s hope to win the elections now heavily rests on Clinton losing so much credibility that voters go for Trump.
INSUFFICIENT
The revelations about Clinton’s emails should is insufficient to hand over the elections to Donald Trump. Trump, as we all know, does not have a clean slate himself.
The controversies surrounding the University he set up, his proposed bar on Muslims being allowed into America, and his condescending comments about Africans being poor and not having good schools, all show Trump not to be fit for president.
PODESTA
The emails hacked from Podesta’s Gmail account features a decade’s worth of email communication of Clinton’s mails.According to a WikiLeaks tweet, the release represented the first 2,050 documents of 50,000 it has hacked from Podesta.
Podesta was a founder of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress and is the campaign chairman for Hilary Clinton and is an influential member of her team. It is a travesty that Wiki leaks openly admit to hack emails, and are able to use the leaks to influence an election campaign.