Rumor is that someone, perhaps Iranian intelligence, hacked somebody on the Trump campaign, possibly Roger Stone. What’s more, The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Politico are in possession of this archive—yet as of the time of writing, have not published any details thereof.

I would like to extend an invitation to any intelligence services, disgruntled Trump staffers, or anyone else in possession of Trump campaign communications: Send them to The American Prospect posthaste. We can promise rapid and highly ethical consideration of anything you’ve got.

Joking aside, there are of course certain ethical responsibilities that come with potentially publishing stolen material. One must also verify the contents to be sure they aren’t fabricated, and do one’s utmost to figure out who is sending them, even if one might not publish their identity, so as to know their motivation. There would need to be a compelling journalistic interest in publishing—for instance, there is no reason for the public to know about mere prurient private details like sexts or nudes.

But it’s not hard to imagine all kinds of stolen information that passes this test—the Pentagon Papers or the Snowden documents were both stolen, for example. Or if it is the Iranian government behind the leak, then that fact by itself is interesting and relevant—illustrating, at a guess, blowback from Trump’s decision to tear up the Iran nuclear deal for no reason, and to assassinate a top Iranian general for no reason. Or if the material includes a lot of J.D. Vance oppo research, it is interesting and newsworthy that Trump chose him anyway.

Additionally, given that this is the Trump campaign, I would be shocked if the emails did not include confessions of previously committed crimes, or discussions of crimes currently being committed, or plans to commit more crimes in the future, and in that case the public has every right to know. Just witness Trump’s 34 felony convictions, or eight Trump cronies who have been sentenced to prison, or Trump’s recent interview with Elon Musk, where he advocated firing workers for going on strike, which violates the National Labor Relations Act. (In response, the United Auto Workers filed an unfair labor practice charge on both Trump and Musk.)

Finally, there is an issue of context and fairness. Trump loudly welcomed the Russian government hacking of the Clinton campaign back in 2016. "Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," he said. "I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press."

He was right about the reward part, too. The Times, the Post, Politico, and most of the rest of the media basically ignored the aforementioned issues of journalistic ethics when it came to Russia hacking the Clinton campaign. The Times in particular published approximately 500 quadrillion CLINTON EMAILS stories, including on dozens of penny-ante subjects like a Bill Clinton adviser asking Hillary Clinton’s State Department for a diplomatic passport.

Vox published an article on John Podesta’s risotto recipe. It’s a lighthearted piece, but also rather invasive. I for one would not prefer my cooking preferences be the subject of national media coverage.

Again, one should not automatically publish whatever comes in over the transom—as mainstream media publications did not do with the incredibly sketchy Hunter Biden laptop, to their credit—but it is a bit rich for legacy media institutions to be acting so stuffily responsible when it’s Trump (apparently) getting the hack-andleak treatment. If anyone on earth has earned some gossipy tabloid coverage of his personal communications, it’s him.