The Heartland Files and the Climate Fight - [Whistle-blowing hero Andy Revkin] - NYTimes.com

Wouldn’t it have been great if a similar message had some from the group and its allies after the mass release of e-mails and files from the University of East Anglia climatic research center in 2009 and last year — documents that skeptics quickly and repeatedly over-interpreted as a damning “Climategate”? That hasn’t been Heartland’s approach.

1.  Regarding the ClimateGate 2.0 documents, how does Revkin know they were "over-interpreted" by skeptics unless he's actually read them?  

2.  This afternoon, Heartland called one to the documents "a total fake" while Politico wrote "Revkin told POLITICO on Wednesday that he’s been able to confirm that the documents are legitimate".    Why doesn't Revkin address this discrepancy?