Assange Promises to Shake Up Hillary

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Neuhaus, Aug 25, 2016.

Loading...
  1. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    The word you're looking for is "plausible". There are whole departments dedicated to creation and spreads of plausible stories, not necessarily consistent ones or even ideologically of the same colour. See Gen. Pacepa's "Dezinformation" book.
    Assange is a Russian intelligence asset in active use in information warfare. Snowden, too. Nutty left is where the KGB is most comfortable; cultivating Nazis and Nazi/Lefty "anti-globalist" alliances is relatively new.
     
  2. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly

    I don't need to look for words, thanks. But I'm not unmindful that one of the Putin regime's more successful strategies for fomenting disharmony in the U.S. is to reveal unpleasant truths about the elites who run it (most notably your celebrity crush), and that this isn't so different from the objectives of people like Assange and Snowden who do the same, albeit for altruistic rather than geopolitical reasons.
     
  3. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Oh right right right, unpleasant "truths" where the net takeaway is what, Uranium One "controversy"? While (just one example) trying to expose a senior Trump staffer who is in the shirt pocket of Oleg Deripaska (vicious even as Russian oligarchs go) is left to poor Alexandra Chalupa, who suffered for it. Pro-Trump Internet troll campaign (bankrolled by the "putin's cook" and convicted felon who also bankrolls the band of deniable murderers fighting Putin's war in Ukraine and Syria) is an open secret - did you hear about it from WikiLeaks? I propose that the simplest explanation is Assange is paid through channels also going through Deripaska and/or Prigogine.

    Russian intel most likely did use lines like this one, in combination with money, when recruiting these two as agents.
     
  4. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

  5. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Abner likes this.
  6. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly

    Wikileaks publishes what others send them. It's not Assange's fault that the Russians/whoever* didn't see any advantage in hacking and releasing files at the RNC.

    But I'll also admit that I can't blame Assange for taking a special pleasure in airing the dirty laundry of an American politician who openly asked whether she could drone him.

    _________________________
    * Basically:

    [​IMG]
     
  7. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    You just described a way to manipulate (or deniably use) WikiLeaks, and a recruitment hook, respectively. OTOH, there were reports on WL refusing to publish leaks on Russia, specifically the hybrid war in Ukraine.
    The man is a Russian spy. This is just obvious. It`s just in present climate, people are willing to cheer on or collaborate with Russian spies, as long as they flatter their ideological biases and(or) ego (see Trump, Donald).
     
  8. heirophant

    heirophant Well-Known Member

    We still don't really know that Wikileaks' source was the Russians. That's one of the giant non-sequiturs at this point. It might have been the Russians who sent hacked DNC files to Wikileaks. Or it might have been those shady Pakistani IT people that Debbie Wasserman Schultz inserted throughout Congress and who had system administrator access to the computers containing the files. Or it might even have been a Bernie Sanders supporter working at the DNC angry at how he/she saw the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign (one and the same at that point) doing all they could behind the scenes to make sure Bernie couldn't win the nomination.

    All the subsequent hysteria (it's obviously being orchestrated) has had its intended effect of totally diverting attention away from the internal subversion of the Democratic Party's nomination process. As soon as anybody brings up the contents of what Wikileaks published, the response is "Pay no attention to the women (Debbie and Hillary) behind the curtain! You're supposed to hate Russia!! Russia!! Russia!! (And Trump of course.)"

    Assuming that legitimate academic scholarship and journalism even exist in the future (by no means certain) this will go down as one of the more bizarre episodes in US history.

    As you say:
    _________________________
    * Basically:

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

    Of course it is. "We may never know, and besides, it doesn't matter". Classic. Pay no attention to how WL' publicity works in perfect unison with Russia propaganda machine (and Trump campaign, which during elections was virtually one and the same). You're supposed to hate Hillary! Lock-her-up! Lock-her-up!

    The truth is, Bernie lost the nomination because not enough people voted for him. Specifically, minorities. All the DNC leak "showed" is DNC party hands not liking Bernie very much. Big surprise. I'm not a long-term operative of a party he is hijacking, and *I* don't like him all that much.
     
  10. Stanislav

    Stanislav Well-Known Member

  11. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

  12. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    You get a shiver in the dark
    It's been raining in the park but meantime
    South of the river you stop and you hold everything
    A band is blowing Dixie double four time
    You feel all right when you hear that music ring
    You step inside but you don't see too many faces
    Coming in out of the rain to hear the jazz go down
    Too much competition too many other places
    But not too many horns can make that sound
    Way on downsouth way on downsouth London town
     
  13. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

  14. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

  15. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    It will be interesting to see who gets their hands on him first, Sessions or Mueller.
     
  16. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly

    Moreno should be ashamed. Hopefully he'll at least get the concession from the British not to extradite Assange to the U.S.
     
  17. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    I think that current extradition treaties would make that impossible but even if it were, why would the British want to do that?
     
  18. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    To be rid of him?
     
  19. Kizmet

    Kizmet Moderator Staff Member

    Well that's what I thought too but that's not what Steve said. ".....concessions from the British not to extradite Assange...."
     
  20. decimon

    decimon Well-Known Member

    Well, if no one wants him then he's Australian and the Brits have a history of dumping their criminals in Australia...
     

Share This Page