PDA

View Full Version : Is Wikileaks out of control?



jack grebe
09-05-2016, 10:50 AM
Could there be an information dump timed at influencing the outcome of the election?

I'm almost betting on it.

Nicholas Carey
09-05-2016, 10:56 AM
Was Wikileaks ever "under control"? I believe the point is to discomfit those in power by revealing the sordid underbelly of the beast.

George Jung
09-05-2016, 11:00 AM
I don't think it's even that honest- power play, all the way.

jack grebe
09-05-2016, 11:00 AM
Was Wikileaks ever "under control"? I believe the point is to discomfit those in power by revealing the sordid underbelly of the beast.

But to use the information to intentionally influence an election?

NickW
09-05-2016, 01:29 PM
But to use the information to intentionally influence an election?

When big money's at stake, anything goes.

Nick

Hugh Conway
09-05-2016, 01:36 PM
I believe the point is to discomfit those in power by revealing the sordid underbelly of the beast.

If that's their goal, they are very piss poor at accomplishing it. They've revealed very little sordid underbelly, and not particularly discomfited anyone in actual power by the revelation of actual facts. They have fed crackpot conspiracists and those who hold existing grudges.

SMARTINSEN
09-05-2016, 05:16 PM
One of these days, Ecuador is going to need something from the U.S...

CWSmith
09-05-2016, 05:46 PM
Assange has said he plans to release papers on Clinton shortly before the election, so of course he's trying to influence the election. He has also said that Clinton must not be allowed to win the election.

Is that "out of control"? It just sounds pretty common these days.

WX
09-05-2016, 09:31 PM
But to use the information to intentionally influence an election?

Let's be serious here, look at your choices...a woman people don't trust and a total fruit loop nut case. What could Wikileaks possibly do to make it worse?

jack grebe
09-05-2016, 09:35 PM
Put the Fruit Loop in.

JayInOz
09-05-2016, 10:11 PM
I nearly puked when I read that Assange had been touted to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. I think the miserable little grub should have been shot for treason. JayInOz

Waddie
09-05-2016, 11:20 PM
I think he deserves a Nobel and a Pulitzer. If our government was as transparent as was promised by the current occupant of the White House we wouldn't need Assange.

regards,
Waddie

skuthorp
09-05-2016, 11:50 PM
One of these days, Ecuador is going to need something from the U.S...
China will probably give it to them free………… well as free as one might expect from a rising power building it's empire.

WX
09-06-2016, 12:55 AM
I nearly puked when I read that Assange had been touted to receive the Nobel Peace Prize. I think the miserable little grub should have been shot for treason. JayInOz

Treason against who?

the crime of betraying one's country, especially by attempting to kill or overthrow the sovereign or government.

Tom Hunter
09-06-2016, 06:44 AM
Clinton has worked hard to get Assange extradited and sent to jail. Of course he is fighting her. I think it's gotten very personal for him, and maybe for her, though it's harder to tell.

Clinton and Obama are both enemies of free information, look at Obama's record of going after people who leak documents. Even if there is not personal animus the Clinton machine and Wikileaks are clearly on the opposite sides of this issue.

jack grebe
09-06-2016, 12:52 PM
Clinton has worked hard to get Assange extradited and sent to jail.
There may be a very good reason for that....... What does he know? What proof does he have?
Now there are rumors that the Clinton camp may have manipulated the Bengazi hearings.....imagine that.

lupussonic
09-06-2016, 01:03 PM
So politicians lie. Woop dee doo.

I think its healthy to have someone calling them on it. They're supposed to serve their electorate, no?

David G
09-06-2016, 01:06 PM
But to use the information to intentionally influence an election?

Kinda like campaigns timing huge media buys - to run dishonest and misleading ads - late enough in the election cycle so there is no time to respond with the facts?

Jim Bow
09-06-2016, 01:09 PM
The Ecuadorian Embassy is actually a large suite of rooms on the first floor of a commercial building. Assange is not exactly beloved by the security folks who have to live there with him. The Brits have a permanent section of police officers on duty in the hallways of the building, and on the street outside.
Met PD are spending millions of s a year keeping an eye out.

SullivanB
09-06-2016, 01:24 PM
Could there be an information dump timed at influencing the outcome of the election?

I'm almost betting on it.

Most everybody is trying to influence this election in one way or another. So what? If Assange is peddling lies, then he's performing a disservice. If he's exposing the truth about those running for the most powerful office in the land, then he's performing a valuable service that the mainstream media are choosing not to perform.

Daniel Noyes
09-06-2016, 01:27 PM
Most everybody is trying to influence this election in one way or another. So what? If Assange is peddling lies, then he's performing a disservice. If he's exposing the truth about those running for the most powerful office in the land, then he's performing a valuable service that the mainstream media are choosing not to perform.

Well said!

if Truth is influencing the election... and Dems are crying foul, that just tells you what Dems really care about.

Hugh Conway
09-06-2016, 02:21 PM
Wikileaks has a long history of claiming to have information that they don't have, claiming that they are about to publish a bombshell that they never publish. Recently, they took credit for publishing a bunch of Hillary emails that were not leaked at all. They were released by the State Department to all the major media outlets. But wikileaks put them up on their webpage and so a lot of people assumed not only that they had been leaked, but that this implies there was some nefarious or scandalous content.

Have they ever leaked anything truly nefarious or scandalous?

SullivanB
09-06-2016, 02:39 PM
Have they ever leaked anything truly nefarious or scandalous?

Well, the "leak" of the DNC emails demonstrating the extent of corrupt complicity between the DNC and the Clinton campaign was certainly nefarious and scandalous.

Daniel Noyes
09-06-2016, 02:42 PM
Well, the "leak" of the DNC emails demonstrating the extent of corrupt complicity between the DNC and the Clinton campaign was certainly nefarious and scandalous.

talk about individuals attempting to influence a US Election! the Dems are throwing up anything to try and distract from their own sordid "miss" deeds

George Jung
09-06-2016, 03:00 PM
ljb5 - you're giving way too much benefit of the doubt here..... what's up? You feeling okay?

Our own little RWW's, on this very thread, care not a whit what the 'truth' is - looking only to bolster their already preconceived notions and lies. I'd say Wiki leaks has found 'their people'.

Hugh Conway
09-06-2016, 03:39 PM
Well, the "leak" of the DNC emails demonstrating the extent of corrupt complicity between the DNC and the Clinton campaign was certainly nefarious and scandalous.

You'd be legitimately shocked to find gambling in Casablanca.

SullivanB
09-06-2016, 04:13 PM
You'd be legitimately shocked to find gambling in Casablanca.

I'm not at all shocked to learn that the Dems have engaged in that kind of conduct. It's been quite clear for some time that they've been selling out the middle class and the poor in service to big money, the treachery of the DNC and the Clinton campaign just a recent example. You simply asked if Wikileaks had ever exposed nefarious or scandalous conduct. I gave you an example. Perhaps you really didn't want an answer.

jack grebe
09-06-2016, 05:12 PM
Perhaps you really didn't want an answer.
Just not the one you gave him, may have something to do with his
"Fundamental relationship with reality"

jack grebe
09-06-2016, 05:20 PM
All over Fox today.

Hugh Conway
09-06-2016, 05:54 PM
I'm not at all shocked to learn that the Dems have engaged in that kind of conduct. It's been quite clear for some time that they've been selling out the middle class and the poor in service to big money, the treachery of the DNC and the Clinton campaign just a recent example. You simply asked if Wikileaks had ever exposed nefarious or scandalous conduct. I gave you an example. Perhaps you really didn't want an answer.

I don't think those are particularly shocking revelations. Confirmations - yes. Revelations - no. Just like finding out rich people avoid taxes isn't news. Or that US embassy people report and spy on the country's they are posted in.

If these are truly revelations, I'm curious where you've been.

SullivanB
09-06-2016, 06:34 PM
I don't think those are particularly shocking revelations. Confirmations - yes. Revelations - no. Just like finding out rich people avoid taxes isn't news. Or that US embassy people report and spy on the country's they are posted in.

If these are truly revelations, I'm curious where you've been.

Then we are in agreement. Let me draw your attention to my response in # 29 wherein I stated that I was "not at all shocked" by the conduct of the DNC and the Clinton campaign that was disclosed by Wikileaks; indeed and sadly, it's the kind of conduct that I've come to expect from this 21st century Democratic Party.

Your question merely asked if Wikileaks had exposed anything nefarious or scandalous. I gave you a recent example of Wikileaks having done just that. Whatever your difficulty with my answer, I certainly wasn't shocked or surprised by that kind of conduct on the part of the contemporary DNC and the Clinton campaign. Sadly, the Democratic Party state of affairs being as bad as it is, I think few people have been surprised at such conduct.

SullivanB
09-06-2016, 08:30 PM
Yes, we all agree that it's not newsworthy... and yet here you are, mentioning it over and over again as if it were.

Why? Two reasons: (1) you heard about it on Wikileaks which helps you present it as if it were salacious and (2) it suits your purposes.

I don't need a wikileaks dump to tell you that's there's rivalry and in-fighting among the Republicans, yet for some reason, you haven't felt like mentioning that over and over.

The fact that the DNC and the Clinton campaign were in cahoots, colluding to stack the deck against the other candidates and actually considering dirty tricks like the one you mention above, is not newsworthy? You've missed the mark on that one. It's the perfect example of what's gone wrong with the Democratic Party, a debasement of the Party that is indeed newsworthy.

As for mentioning the rivalry and in-fighting among the Republicans, the Forum Dems, their party and the mainstream media have that job pretty well covered.