Liberal Reporter Suspended From X After Doxing JD Vance
Liberal journalist Ken Klippenstein has been suspended from X, formerly known as Twitter, after publishing private personal details about Vice Presidential candidate, Senator JD Vance (R-OH). The report, described as an Iranian dossier, included sensitive information such as phone numbers, family details, and more — all under the guise of “journalism.”
Critics argue it was a clear case of doxxing and a serious breach of privacy. The dossier, believed to have been obtained from foreign adversaries, raised serious concerns about interference in U.S. elections. The leaked document reportedly contains research on Vance, which some allege was collected by the Trump campaign and has been described as hacked material.
While Klippenstein may have framed it as newsworthy, many have questioned whether this crosses ethical and legal boundaries, especially when dealing with data that could potentially harm national security or disrupt the electoral process.
Ken Klippenstein just published the Iranian dossier on JD Vance, which includes his private personal details, personal phone numbers, family details and more under the guise of “journalism.”
Klippenstein doxxed JD Vance.
Publishing information from a foreign adversary that was… pic.twitter.com/Hccb8SEO8r
— Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) September 26, 2024
X moved swiftly, preventing users from posting links to Klippenstein’s newsletter that contained the hacked document. Users attempting to share the link have found their posts blocked, with searches for related posts also yielding no results. The platform has cracked down on similar content in the past, but the decision to suspend Klippenstein has already sparked heated debates.
“Ken Klippenstein was temporarily suspended for violating our rules on posting unredacted private personal information, specifically Sen. Vance’s physical addresses and the majority of his Social Security number,” a spokesperson for X told The Hill.
Last month, the Trump campaign announced a security breach, reporting that internal documents were leaked. The FBI later identified Iran as the perpetrator, aiming to disrupt the presidential campaigns. Although these documents were circulated among several media outlets, they chose not to publish the compromised materials. The FBI also disclosed that Iran tried to engage the Biden campaign by sharing the stolen documents. The Harris campaign acknowledged that its staff received suspicious emails, likely phishing attempts from Iran, which they disregarded.
“The dossier has been offered to me and I’ve decided to publish it because it’s of keen public interest in an election season,” Klippenstein wrote in his Substack. “It’s a 271-page research paper the Trump campaign prepared to vet now vice presidential candidate J.D. Vance. As far as I can tell, it hasn’t been altered, but even if it was, its contents are publicly verifiable. I’ll let it speak for itself.”
Klippenstein claimed that he published the Vance dossier because of its public interest, particularly during an election season. He stated the dossier originated from an alleged Iranian government hack of the Trump campaign, but the media has refrained from publishing it due to concerns over foreign interference. Klippenstein disagreed with this stance, arguing that journalists should not act as gatekeepers for the public. The 271-page dossier reportedly contains Trump campaign research on Vance, and Klippenstein asserts that while it may have been obtained by adversarial actors, its contents are factual and verifiable.
Doxxing, a practice where individuals’ private information is maliciously exposed, has long been a hot-button issue. Doxxing is the act of publicly revealing previously private personal information about an individual or organization, typically via the internet. The information can include details such as real names, home addresses, phone numbers, email addresses, or other identifying data. The intent behind doxxing can vary, ranging from harassment and shaming to causing harm or exacting revenge. It is generally considered a malicious practice, as it violates privacy and can lead to real-world consequences like threats, harassment, or even physical harm.