Leaked texts from Manafort's daughters

I have no words.

https://www.lareviewofbooks.org/article/kompromat-or-revelations-from-the-unpublished-portions-of-andrea-manaforts-hacked-texts/#!

I read/skimmed through this quickly so maybe I missed something,  but my reaction was that it was a total crap piece of writing.  It had nothing to do with collusion.  It was some very private family stuff that is no one's business and exposes them to the public.  The author tries to justify it by referencing Seymour Hersch's regret about not exposing Nixon as a wifebeater--but Manafort is not a president and I don't see how exposure of his kinky sex life is going to change history or help his poor wife.  The daughters, also don't deserve to be publicly exposed as the horrors they seem to be. The author tries to link it to her twisted view of Putin, somehow.  Manafort worked in the Ukraine on the anti-Russian side--he was trying to get Viktor Yaunkovych to join the EU--a critical point of which the author seems unaware. So, he was not in cahoots with Putin as she assumes and that would throw off her Putin-related vocabulary lesson on compromise. Or whatever point she was trying ultimately to make.

I agree with Nan.  This doesn't matter at all.

Interesting. I also skimmed, but read a completely different story. One that seemed more psychological and explored:

• why / how some wives of abusive husbands stay, 
• and how those who are unhappy that their privilege has been gained by 'blood-money' sometimes try to leave that circle, and sometimes get pulled back in. 

sprout said:
Interesting. I also skimmed, but read a completely different story. One that seemed more psychological and explored:

• why / how some wives of abusive husbands stay, 
• and how those who are unhappy that their privilege has been gained by 'blood-money' sometimes try to leave that circle, and sometimes get pulled back in. 

 All fine lessons, but do we need to know the actual people involved?  

I gathered that was an ethical conundrum for the author, who ultimately decided that the public availability of the texts allowed for their use as such a raw exploration of abuse, power, and money.

sprout said:
I gathered that was an ethical conundrum for the author, who ultimately decided that the public availability of the texts allowed for their use as such a raw exploration of abuse, power, and money.

Well, do you think she did the right thing?  Her understanding of what Manifort did is flawed, and his children may not have understood either. Why not a Netflix series or a novel? 

Would I have given this greater exposure as done by the author? I'm not sure. 

Did I read it and gain a greater understanding of part of the human condition that I have limited experience with? Yes.