• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

WikiLeaks now straight up telling Americans to vote for Trump

yllus

yllus

Elite Member & Lifer
The hell is going on over there? This is very, very far from their charter of radical transparency.

WikiLeaks on Twitter:

Leak early, leak often: If WikiLeaks had obtained Clinton emails earlier, US voters could have chosen Sanders v Trump. So do it. Do it now.​
 
I'm not surprised a bit, IMO Wikileaks exists to promote an agenda and little else, they are not about freeing information and Assange is no hero.
 
I don't know if this is legit, but Wikileaks certainly has become agenda driven. Not sure it started out that way, but it appears to me that a combination of self-preservation and ego may be what motivates its' actions these days.
 
sandorski said:
I don't know if this is legit, but Wikileaks certainly has become agenda driven. Not sure it started out that way, but it appears to me that a combination of self-preservation and ego may be what motivates its' actions these days.
Click to expand...

Wikileaks has always been agenda-driven. It's an anti-establishment, vigilante kind of agenda.
 
emperus said:
I think Wikileaks will lose support from a lot of people after this election. I think they highlighted one of the fears people had with them; selectively leaking information to pursue and agenda and propagandize.
Click to expand...

If there is anti-Trump/anti-Republican/anti-Putin/etc info out there, what is stopping the possessors of it from leaking it to other sources, assuming Wikileaks is refusing to publish it?

sandorski said:
Perhaps, it just seems overly focussed on the US. That said, perhaps I am ill informed on the kind of things it has exposed over the years.
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_material_published_by_WikiLeaks
 
Wikileaks started as a non political avenue for information to flow to the public. What it has become now has destroyed any credibility they had.

It's a shame really. At the beginning it was valuable in helping the public by exposing wrongdoing. Now it's just looks like a tool for Putin.
 
HamburgerBoy said:
Would it be less transparent if they didn't make their intentions obvious?
Click to expand...

Depends on what kind of transparency we're talking about. More transparent with their intentions, perhaps, but clearly there should be some doubt their transparency when it comes to their so-called willingness to release any and all information to the public.

They are just another slanted source of information that wants to drive people to the conclusions that they (Wikileaks) like.
 
Balt said:
Depends on what kind of transparency we're talking about. More transparent with their intentions, perhaps, but clearly there should be some doubt their transparency when it comes to their so-called willingness to release any and all information to the public.
Click to expand...

What information are they currently withholding that you believe would be relevant to today?
 
HamburgerBoy said:
What information are they currently withholding that you believe would be relevant to today?
Click to expand...

Whether or not they actually are withholding information is really beside the point, particularly since it would be almost impossible to verify. The point is that they've made it obvious that they can't be trusted to be an 'equal opportunity' offender.

I can't prove the RNC has derogatory information about Trump, either, but I sure don't think they are a reliable or objective source.
 
Balt said:
Whether or not they actually are withholding information is really beside the point, particularly since it would be almost impossible to verify. The point is that they've made it obvious that they can't be trusted to be an 'equal opportunity' offender.
Click to expand...

How is it obvious if it's impossible to verify?
 
Julian Assange despises the United States and actively wishes it harm, a fact which has been obvious since long before the election. I don't know why anyone ever thought he was politically neutral.

Anyway, his disdain for the US is why he supports Trump.
 
HamburgerBoy said:
What information are they currently withholding that you believe would be relevant to today?
Click to expand...

ABC News radio just reported that Wikileaks dropped another load of Clinton campaign emails, this time relating to opposition Bernie Sanders research developed during the primary. Wow, I am so underwhelmed... again. Something that all campaigns do and it's some kind of revelation? These timed releases clearly prove that they withhold information and try to time its release in hopes of having a negative effect on our electoral process. Granted, these releases are damned lame but that's what happens when you get desperate, have nothing and are willing to throw everything against the wall in the hope that something sticks. It's more than clear to me that Wikileaks is being used as a weapon and their main target is the United States.

But you're just asking questions, right? 😉
 
DrDoug said:
I'm not surprised a bit, IMO Wikileaks exists to promote an agenda and little else, they are not about freeing information and Assange is no hero.
Click to expand...

IMO, this is more of an assange thing than it is wikileaks. Assange astranged himself years ago from his core board and well before his "Exile," they were trying to get him out. The personality of Wikileaks is completely tied to Assange's ego and while he maintains control, it is only ever going to reflect his very clear agenda.

I recall reading some time ago that he really has no friends over there as the rest of the wikileaks power base actually wants to maintain the air of transparent neutrality. It is almost completely certain that they have the very same sort of leaked documents from the RNC and certainly a long history of Trump's own correspondence within his empire, but it isn't being released.

How rational is it to accept that only the DNC and only the Clintons are capable of having their information hacked? haha.
 
Months before the Clinton/DNC Wikileaks started, there was a thread on 4chan that predicted what would go down, the author claimed the leaks coming were from US intelligence sources that hated Clinton and the Clinton Foundation. It was a fascinating thread, but for all I know, that was sourced by the Russians as disinformation as well, or some lunatic basement dweller.
 
And people have kept on insisting "it can't happen here"😵 Just goes to show what "people" know, dunnit... 🙄
 
DrDoug said:
ABC News radio just reported that Wikileaks dropped another load of Clinton campaign emails, this time relating to opposition Bernie Sanders research developed during the primary. Wow, I am so underwhelmed... again. Something that all campaigns do and it's some kind of revelation? These timed releases clearly prove that they withhold information and try to time its release in hopes of having a negative effect on our electoral process. Granted, these releases are damned lame but that's what happens when you get desperate, have nothing and are willing to throw everything against the wall in the hope that something sticks. It's more than clear to me that Wikileaks is being used as a weapon and their main target is the United States.

But you're just asking questions, right? 😉
Click to expand...

I agree that they're timing the leaks to maximize damage to the Clinton campaign. It is very clear that Assange does not like Clinton. However, from the context of my conversation with Balt, I was referring to Republican/Trump-related dirt that Wikileaks is refusing to release.

zinfamous said:
t is almost completely certain that they have the very same sort of leaked documents from the RNC and certainly a long history of Trump's own correspondence within his empire, but it isn't being released.

How rational is it to accept that only the DNC and only the Clintons are capable of having their information hacked? haha.
Click to expand...

This assumption would seem to suggest that Russia attempted to or successfully hacked the RNC as well, which would fly in the face of the current mantra that Russia started all of this for the primary purpose of making Clinton look bad and Trump look good.

You're also assuming that Trump's empire has the same visibility and reach that the DNC does, which I think is a pretty terrible assumption considering that Trump keeps a very tight lid on his operations and image, and does not have the same obligation to keep potentially-damning documentation on hand that a public official might.
 
woolfe9998 said:
Julian Assange despises the United States and actively wishes it harm, a fact which has been obvious since long before the election. I don't know why anyone ever thought he was politically neutral.

Anyway, his disdain for the US is why he supports Trump.
Click to expand...

Are you all this stupid, or just uneducated on the subject? His issue is with Hilary, there wasn't any hacking, and the dude that gave the info was murdered.

Go look up the issues between them two, it started long before she ran for president.
 
HamburgerBoy said:
I agree that they're timing the leaks to maximize damage to the Clinton campaign. It is very clear that Assange does not like Clinton. However, from the context of my conversation with Balt, I was referring to Republican/Trump-related dirt that Wikileaks is refusing to release.



This assumption would seem to suggest that Russia attempted to or successfully hacked the RNC as well, which would fly in the face of the current mantra that Russia started all of this for the primary purpose of making Clinton look bad and Trump look good.

You're also assuming that Trump's empire has the same visibility and reach that the DNC does, which I think is a pretty terrible assumption considering that Trump keeps a very tight lid on his operations and image, and does not have the same obligation to keep potentially-damning documentation on hand that a public official might.
Click to expand...
agreed, no way to compare her potential exposure to his.
 
Zstream said:
Are you all this stupid, or just uneducated on the subject? His issue is with Hilary, there wasn't any hacking, and the dude that gave the info was murdered.

Go look up the issues between them two, it started long before she ran for president.
Click to expand...
First there is zero evidence Seth Rich gave anything to Wikileaks. Second, Seth was found conscious and alert. You don't think maybe, just maybe, he would have said something to the police himself?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top