Please!
If there's something true in the story, why would Podesta and Clinton want to give it more publicity?
And if there's nothing in the story, isn't that all the more reason why they'd want it to die, rather than bringing it to wider attention?
Try thinking more broadly. What would serve to discredit an entire group of people and paint them as crazy extremists whose media outlets are dangerous to society?
(1) When a strange story comes up which is unlikely to be true, start running stories about how "fake news" is bad and outlets that are involved in it should be censored.
(2) Accuse vast sections of society as having voted against "normal" liberal candidates because they were influenced by "fake news" and got their information - some of which is "Russian propaganda" from unreliable web sites. Like Breitbart, or Drudge Report.
(3) Work to stir up the strange story, and hope some mentally ill person takes the bait. If they do, exploit the tragedy as confirmation that "fake news" and "hate speech" from the "alt-right" media and "Trump supporters" was to blame.
(4) If the mentally ill person does something really horrible, and it involves a firearm, rush forward with all the anti-gun legislation and PR material that was drafted ahead of time.