I don't doubt the veracity of what WikiLeaks releases, but I wonder what it is they chose to withhold. You can selectively release material meant to damage one faction, group, party or country and not their opponent(s) and put your finger on the scales (so to speak). Believing they are a purely neutral player with no biases is incredibly naive.
Putin is a sabre rattler...he's up for election...smoke and mirrors and the world isn't fooled by his bullshit....he's not a mystery anymore and he isn't as popular in Russia as he'd like to think these days
We're dealing with Putin just like we deal with Kim Jong Un.....both sabre rattlers dying to be players on the world stage...Putin may not win the next election in Russia....Nato just called his bluff in the Mediterranean and to think Trump wants to scrap that alliance. Fuck Putin...he has no power unless you believe he has more friends than I believe he does...the last thing you do with a guy like Putin is empower him with respect.
Naive? Well do you think they are withholding Trump's tax records? His confessions of serially abusing his maids? It must be obvious, if they can hack Hillary's closet server, they can hack everyone else at will. Dang! if they had that sort of dirt on the Donald, how friggin much would that be worth?
That is close to what I feel about Hillary. She has disrespected the shit out of the American people. Putin not so much.
You guys are very strange. Sure, let's just put on our party dress and go give Putin a big kiss. What the hell do we have to lose? If he treats us badly, maybe we'll sleep with China to get back at him! We didn't just decide to have Russia as an enemy because Hillary is mean. World history didn't start in 2009. barfo
Wikileaks doesn't target anybody. They don't hack anybody. They verify and publish. They simply expose corruption, especially political corruption, by publishing evidence that they have verified is true. They have a perfect record of accuracy and 10 Pulitzer Prizes. The evidence comes to them from journalists, whistleblowers, hackers, detectives, relatives, people with a grudge, people with a conscience, people who stumbled across something, people who know only Wikileaks will publish it. The Clinton Crime Family's expanse rivals that of the Mafia a few decades ago, so naturally there's a lot of enemies looking for revenge and a lot of poorly buried bodies to expose. With recent revelations that Obama, DOJ, and the CIA are basically running a shadow government deeply involved in Clinton schemes and the FBI is getting chewed up for not turning a blind eye, I expect some monstrous leaks will just keep piling on for the next 3-4 years at least. Then there are the docs spewing from the several lawsuits Judicial Watch has going, mostly only because Obama and Co. keep violating the Freedom of Information Act. In the end this will be the trial(s) of the century, and scores of "famous" people are going to prison.
Defections Within WikiLeaks, there has been public disagreement between founder and spokesperson Julian Assange and Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the website's former German representative who was suspended by Assange. Domscheit-Berg announced on 28 September 2010 that he was leaving the organisation due to internal conflicts over management of the website.[117][259][260] Julian Assange (left) with Daniel Domscheit-Berg. Domscheit-Berg was ejected from WikiLeaks and started a rival "whistleblower" organisation named OpenLeaks. On 25 September 2010, after being suspended by Assange for "disloyalty, insubordination and destabilization", Daniel Domscheit-Berg, the German spokesman for WikiLeaks, told Der Spiegel that he was resigning, saying "WikiLeaks has a structural problem. I no longer want to take responsibility for it, and that's why I am leaving the project."[261][262][263] Assange accused Domscheit-Berg of leaking information to Newsweek, claiming the WikiLeaks team was unhappy with Assange's management and handling of the Afghan war document releases.[263] Daniel Domscheit-Berg wanted greater transparency in the articles released to the public. Another vision of his was to focus on providing technology that allowed whistle-blowers to protect their identity as well as a more transparent way of communicating with the media, forming new partnerships and involving new people.[264] Domscheit-Berg left with a small group to start OpenLeaks, a new leak organisation and website with a different management and distribution philosophy.[261][265] While leaving, Daniel Domscheit-Berg copied and then deleted roughly 3,500 unpublished documents from the WikiLeaks servers,[266] including information on the US government's 'no-fly list' and inside information from 20 right-wing organisations, and according to a WikiLeaks statement, 5 gigabytes of data relating to Bank of America, the internal communications of 20 neo-Nazi organisations and US intercept information for "over a hundred internet companies".[267] In Domscheit-Berg's book he wrote: "To this day, we are waiting for Julian to restore security, so that we can return the material to him, which was on the submission platform."[268] In August 2011, Domscheit-Berg claims he permanently deleted the files "in order to ensure that the sources are not compromised."[269] Herbert Snorrason, a 25-year-old Icelandic university student, resigned after he challenged Assange on his decision to suspend Domscheit-Berg and was bluntly rebuked.[263] Iceland MP Birgitta Jónsdóttir also left WikiLeaks, citing lack of transparency, lack of structure, and poor communication flow in the organisation.[270] According to the periodical The Independent (London), at least a dozen key supporters of WikiLeaks left the website during 2010.[271] Non-disclosure agreements Those working for Wikileaks are reportedly required to sign sweeping non-disclosure agreements covering all conversations, conduct, and material, with Assange having sole power over disclosure.[272] The penalty for non-compliance in one such agreement was reportedly £12 million.[272] Wikileaks has been challenged for this practice, as it seen to be hypocritical for an organization dedicated to transparency to limit the transparency of its inner workings and limit the accountability of powerful individuals in the organization.[272][273][274]
Now the lid is coming off the sex cults, the child-selling to pedophiles... http://www.dangerandplay.com/2016/1...x-cult-with-connections-to-human-trafficking/
Wiki Leaks may not need the dirt on him http://www.politicususa.com/2016/11/01/spy-russia-cultivating-trump.html I post that with the caveat that I don't know if it's true, but if it is, then I start to ask myself what does Russia gain from a pliable and subservient Trump, and what is Julian Assange's long game with respect to the balance of world power? My suspicion is that a great many people in the world are very tired of a a single 'super power' in the form of the U.S. and would like a more balanced playing field of geopolitics (and who can blame them really?), but regardless I think it's always useful to ask and answer what other people's motives are when they exercise political power. When Snowden dropped his NSA bulk-spying revelations I think he was acting from conscience and wanted to expose what he saw as abuses of the 4th amendment by our government; it doesn't appear he's profited in any way. With Assange I think his motives are less transparent and bear more scrutiny. If you think I'm in tinfoil hat territory, then how many stories do we get about Wiki Leaks exposing Russian human rights abuses lately? http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/01/world/europe/wikileaks-julian-assange-russia.html?_r=0 But none of this really absolves Clinton of wrong-doing. She clearly acted recklessly with classified information and obviously didn't uphold her duties with information security and transparency, and if it's found that she acted outside the law I hope she's tried and convicted -- maybe not of full-blown treason, but gross negligence at least.
Gotta love the fact that Clinton knows damn well whose funding ISIS and willingly takes money from them for favors. Then we continue to send American forces to the meat grinder in Syria and some end up dead. Completely corrupt.
