Leaking Is More Science Than Art These Days

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.

Is the intelligence community going overboard with the leaks?

I don’t have a firm opinion about this yet, but I will say this: Whoever is leaking the dirt about Jared Kushner is doing a very considered job of it. Instead of just dropping a big bomb, they seem to be very carefully dropping one tiny new item every few days. First we hear that a person “close to Trump” is part of the FBI investigation. Then we hear it’s Kushner. Then we hear it’s about Russia. Then we hear it’s about setting up backchannel comms. This guarantees a steady drip of new headlines and keeps the story in the news for weeks and weeks. It’s the most damaging possible way of handling leaks like this.

I’ll cop to some partisan feelings about this. Is it wrong to deliberately string this stuff out in order to cause maximum damage? Sure, of course. But it’s also what Julian Assange did to Hillary Clinton. It’s what Judicial Watch did to Clinton. It’s what the FBI did to Clinton. It’s what Republican congressional committees did to Clinton. This is just the way the game is played these days, and there are no innocents on either side of the aisle.


Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend