Stop It. Stefan Halper Wasn’t Spying on Trump

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.

Why is Donald Trump using the word SPY every ten minutes or so even though there’s zero evidence that Stefan Halper was spying in any normal definition of the word? A friend of Trump explains:

Trump told one ally this week that he wanted “to brand” the informant a “spy,” believing the more nefarious term would resonate more in the media and with the public. He went on to debut the term “Spygate” on Wednesday, despite its previous associations with a 2007 NFL scandal over videotaping coaches.

I’m pretty sure we all knew this, didn’t we? Just like his use of wiretap last year. But it will achieve its purpose. Conservative media now has its marching orders, and soon enough the rest of the media will follow up with thumbsuckers titled “When Is a Spy Not a Spy?” or “The Spy Who Wasn’t” or “Stop It. Stefan Halper Wasn’t Spying on Trump.” Plus there will be 2,000-word explainers galore from national security reporters about how professionals use the word spy and why Trump is wrong to use it.

And that’s fine. All that matters to Trump is that it gets lots of play. Why, this post has already repeated the word spy nine time. Oops. Ten times. It’ll be about ten thousand before this is over, and that’s all most of the public will remember about it.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

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

Latest