Earlier quoted context omitted.
Difficult to imagine this being "influenced" by Clinton. It feels like it would be to Trump's significant advantage if this happens. It plays directly into his narrative.
Not necessarily. If she is fearful of very damaging leaks in the pipeline, Clinton would want to make sure that, at the very least, they don't come out through Wikileaks, which has a 100% track record of real leaks and can't be denied.
Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
431–440 of 1001 posts
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#432Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's pretty well known that Assange has a vendetta against Hillary Clinton. Just searching for Assange Clinton on Google brings up lots of articles on the subject.
To be fair, it's because Clinton and her staff have called both publicly and privately for him to be executed, extrajudicially if need be. I'd have a grudge too.
That's a rather extraordinary statement to make without providing any substantiation!
I had a quick search around to see what I could find, and I did find a recent tweet from Wikileaks showing a clip from some pundit on Fox News called Bob Beckel calling for exactly that: https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/763380671796678656/vide...
But a little further checking showed that despite this being tweeted in August this year with a headline and hashtag suggesting a link to the leaked emails, this video is actually from 2010, moreover from my exhaustive five minute search (it wasn't exhaustive really) I couldn't find any evidence of a link to Clinton's campaign, in fact according to Wikipedia the last campaign this strange chap worked on was Walter Mondale's in 1984.
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#433Earlier quoted context omitted.
How about Hillary Clinton literally saying "Can't we just drone this guy?" [1] [1] https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/782906224937410562
Respectable organizations don't copy text from unsourced articles, change the font to Courier to make it look like a cable, and then screenshot the result. Why did Wikileaks feel the need to do this? Is it because they felt silly just linked to a completely unsourced story on a partisan rag?
Simple: character limit on Twitter, want to provide context to the statement, and want more exposure to the quote than a link would provide.
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#434Earlier quoted context omitted.
>We're in the middle of some crazy propaganda war right now Agreed. It's like some people somewhere woke up and realized hiring some script kiddies to hack old people that use the same password for all their accounts is a lot cheaper and easier than old-fashioned espionage. The frenzied pace at which all of this is happening reminds me a child with a new toy. >gaslighting from both sides I disagree that Clinton is tr…
If hundreds of pieces of direct evidence don't suffice, then I'm not sure what does. The Clinton Foundation has done countless extremely illegal and unethical things. Between CTR, the Bernie fiasco, the fake Craigslist ads, the "public and private" positions, I'm not sure how you can say that HRC isn't trying to create an alternate reality.
Not sure I entirely buy this, Charity Watch gives the Clinton Foundation high marks. [1] You might be able to make some arguments for crossing some ethical lines, but to say they have done "countless extremely illegal and unethical things" is pushing the conspiratorial line.
[1] https://www.charitywatch.org/ratings-and-metrics/bill-hillar...
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#435Earlier quoted context omitted.
A vote for any third party candidate is a bigger statement, and maximizes your voter power even in a non swing-state.
A vote for third-party doesn't maximize your voter power, it diminishes it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7tWHJfhiyo
Does your link discuss that if a third party candidate gets 5% of the vote they will receive federal funding next election? If so how can they claim a vote for a third party diminishes voter power?
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#436Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sarcasm aside. There is a caveat to the legality of classified materials, usually you must have been "entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of". Which alludes to the fact that you would first have to have been read in, or taken the material that you knew was classified. There is also a "requirement" to "knowingly" cause harm. I put these in quotes because the wording and the enforcement of that requir…
> That being said. If you do currently hold a clearance, visiting Wikileaks is a violation of your NDA/ReadIn, Employment Agreement, and the UCMJ for service members. Interesting. Could you explain that more?
I never saw anything in writing, but after the Bradley Manning leaks we got a SHIT TON of briefs about not visiting WL, no looking at the leaked docs, and a whole lot of other "don'ts". Never heard of anyone visiting the site after that, and never heard of any shit rolling down from people violating the orders.
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#437Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, "state actor" could certainly refer to Ecuador deciding to turn off Assange's access. WikiLeaks tends to be fairly economical with the truth about its own operations, so being purposefully ambiguous isn't anything new for them. And, while Ecuador hasn't had to deal with meaningful diplomatic repercussions from sheltering Assange, the high-profile role WL is taking in the 2016 elections, and specifi…
I don't think Assange is a partisan. He's Australian after all and has no stake in this election. I think he is releasing info on Hillary because that is what he has and is timing the release for maximum public exposure. If he had similar info on Trump, I firmly believe he would be doing the same thing.
So why does wiki leaks retweet Gulliani?
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#438Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the other hand, "state actor" could certainly refer to Ecuador deciding to turn off Assange's access. WikiLeaks tends to be fairly economical with the truth about its own operations, so being purposefully ambiguous isn't anything new for them. And, while Ecuador hasn't had to deal with meaningful diplomatic repercussions from sheltering Assange, the high-profile role WL is taking in the 2016 elections, and specifi…
I don't think Assange is a partisan. He's Australian after all and has no stake in this election. I think he is releasing info on Hillary because that is what he has and is timing the release for maximum public exposure. If he had similar info on Trump, I firmly believe he would be doing the same thing.
> He's Australian after all and has no stake in this election.
He's in sanctuary, in part, because of fear of extradition to the US. So yeah, he does have a stake.
If Clinton wins she has no motivation to stop an extradition, since she figures in WL and other leaks.
If Trump wins, and Assange/WL is seen to have implicitly supported him, there is a hope for Assange that President Trump could prohibit his DoJ from extraditing, and his DoD from rendering. Not from gratitude, but because Trump is vindictive and that would be a way to stick it to ... to ... The Global Media/Banking/Government/NotWhite Conspiracy.
I'm kind of amazed that WL or someone else hasn't hacked and released Trump data. Do they just not use computers?
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#439The more I look at this, the more it seems like a brilliant move by Assange to force the media to report more on Wikileaks and the Podesta emails, not just Trumps locker-room antics.
Locker-room antics of sexual assault?
Re: Wikileaks: Julian Assange's internet access 'cut'
#440Earlier quoted context omitted.
If hundreds of pieces of direct evidence don't suffice, then I'm not sure what does. The Clinton Foundation has done countless extremely illegal and unethical things. Between CTR, the Bernie fiasco, the fake Craigslist ads, the "public and private" positions, I'm not sure how you can say that HRC isn't trying to create an alternate reality.
What are the countless and extremely illegal and unethical things?
[deleted]