Wikileaks Attacking during an Election

[Lighthouse]

Which is what the Weiner thing entails, they got another device with emails. They don't even know if they are emails they already looked over originally. They gotta do the fine tooth comb thing again. Alas they still search for a smoking gun that may not even exist. Wikileaks apparently would be more likely to be able to provide some smoking gun if it ever existed.

Still a little over a week left. I'd have to imagine it won't be all quiet on front from here on out.
Will be happy when all of this drama is over. Then again, there may be lingering and festering effects afterwards.

 

[idav]

Still a little over a week left. I'd have to imagine it won't be all quiet on front from here on out.
Will be happy when all of this drama is over. Then again, there may be lingering and festering effects afterwards.

After all this there will be drama no matter who is elected. Kinda sad to think about. Email scandals or sexual assault scandals.

 

[Twilight Hue]

I don't know about others but it seems some unnamed source does not want Democrats or maybe specifically Hillary to take office. If this were about Hillary, would this source wait until he election to get any damning evidence out on the public. When Assange is interviewed he says he will not name his source and people speculate Russia but whoever it is clearly has a partisan agenda. He says he is about truth but this is clearly times for maximum effect, especially with a very slow methodical release of info.
http://www.thepoliticalinsider.com/wikileaks-julian-assange-hillary-arrest-biggest-leak/

I like truth as much as the next person but I've seen wikileaks as an affront against citizens general privacy. Now perhaps it's not wikileaks, they are the guys that say NSA has everyone's internet history, and somehow this turns into Hillarys history being released about adult diaper searches. NSA and or FBI themselves could be the source or even people within the organization and would be rather convenient to blame Russia. Plenty of people on our side hate Dems and hate Hillary

Now I am not much for conspiracy but it seems could never be more apparent.

Why are we waiting for an election to reveal truth much like the FBI ill timed look into Hillarys emails just cause they have the intel.

Hillary is not phased she wants to know what the info FBI is looking into just like everyone else.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...-email-discovery/ar-AAjxwWt?OCID=ansmsnnews11

We will have to see if anyone has more info than personal non criminal web searches someone has done.

Enforcement dosent pause for holidays much less an election. Timing out of convenience or otherwise isn't a consideration in criminal matters nor should it be.

Catching the conspiratorial bug?

I though it was just the Pubs that go off in those directions based on the banter here. "0)

I do agree it's a wait and see situation.

 

[Acim]

Going through emails with a fine tooth comb sounds pretty standard considering the inquiry.

I meant in how they interacted with people outside of FBI.

The whole point was there was not "every reason" to seek prosecution. They were looking for a smoking gun and none was found.

All that is debatable, even within the FBI apparently, which is why it seems to go against the standard.

If still no reason (at least way you may wish to understand it), then one would think there is no problem (for Dems) to have FBI do what they standardly do, regardless of how close it is to the election.

 

[Lyndon]

Go Wikileaks!
Why shouldn't they disclose the skeletons in DNC closets?
This is their business, & we as a country are better off with
light shed upon governmental misfeasance & malfeasance.

Note also that Hillary's ally, Obama, is doing what he can to
attack them for whistleblowing. If Assange takes this personally,
this is his right to work against this duo. Note too that the DNC has
its own attack dogs, who have been caught plotting violence at
Trump rallies. Relatively speaking, Assange is taking the high road.

Hillary's latest email eruption wasn't even due to Wikileaks, but
rather to fellow Democrat, Anthony Weiner
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/29/us/politics/fbi-hillary-clinton-email.html

How would you feel if all your emails were suddenly made public, don't have anything to hide?????

 

[Revoltingest]

Assange is hardly taking the high road with the timing of it all. I'm not afraid of truth but they've been sitting on all this for a long time just waiting to mess with the election process. It makes me care that much less about what Hillary or the Clintons have been doing. I've already had my suspicions for years, but lets wait until an alleged serial sexual assaulter is the other side of the candidacy. The drama runs deep both ways far as I can tell. Yeah and the Weiner thing doesn't make it any better with the timing of it all. I've heard in the past they wait till after elections to even hint that a subpoena is coming, especially when there isn't any real info and is probably not relevant to Hillary specifically.

I say Assange is taking the high road because although he appears to be campaigning
against Hillary, this is his right, & he apparently using factually correct information.
This differs from the DNC, which uses paid fomenters of violence & disinformation.
Go, Julian!

 

[Revoltingest]

Assange is hardly taking the high road with the timing of it all. I'm not afraid of truth but they've been sitting on all this for a long time just waiting to mess with the election process. It makes me care that much less about what Hillary or the Clintons have been doing. I've already had my suspicions for years, but lets wait until an alleged serial sexual assaulter is the other side of the candidacy. The drama runs deep both ways far as I can tell. Yeah and the Weiner thing doesn't make it any better with the timing of it all. I've heard in the past they wait till after elections to even hint that a subpoena is coming, especially when there isn't any real info and is probably not relevant to Hillary specifically.

I say Assange is taking the high road because although he appears to be campaigning
against Hillary, this is his right, & he apparently using factually correct information.
This differs from the DNC, which uses paid fomenters of violence & disinformation.
Go, Julian!

 

[Revoltingest]

Saying people hire experts and claiming Hillary would be an expert while needing outside help are quite different things.

They are indeed 2 different things.
But I wouldn't expect any disagreement on this.

 

[Revoltingest]

How would you feel if all your emails were suddenly made public, don't have anything to hide?????

I wouldn't like it.
But there's nothing embarrassing or illegal in mine.
I take appropriate security measures for the level of risk I have.
Hillary should've done as well as I do.
But the, I have an IQ of almost 70 even with one arm tied behind my back.

 

[columbus]

Go Wikileaks!
Why shouldn't they disclose the skeletons in DNC closets?

I would be fine with Wikileaks if they weren't so partisan and antiUSA.

I was happy back when they attacked the ugliness that goes on behind the scenes. I saw it as global political game changer. Don't say anything on the internet that you would be embarrassed to have made public.

But it didn't happen that way. Nothing from Wikileaks about Russian secrets or Chinese or Ecuadorians.
Now, nothing about the RNC or Trump's TeaParty. Only the DNC and Clinton. What's with that?
An attack on the USA, that's what. The people and the political process. And further more, the Republicans are encouraging yet more such attacks. To me, that is yet more reason to never vote for a Republican again. They are actively promoting attacks on the USA because they are more partisan than patriotic.
Tom

 

[Lighthouse]

How would you feel if all your emails were suddenly made public, don't have anything to hide?????

If Wikileaks wanted to publish my emails, the first thing I'd do is release all of my emails personally if I had nothing to hide.

 

[Twilight Hue]

So should all criminal investigations henceforth be suspended just because it's an election cycle?

 

[Lighthouse]

I would be fine with Wikileaks if they weren't so partisan and antiUSA.

I was happy back when they attacked the ugliness that goes on behind the scenes. I saw it as global political game changer. Don't say anything on the internet that you would be embarrassed to have made public.

But it didn't happen that way. Nothing from Wikileaks about Russian secrets or Chinese or Ecuadorians.
Now, nothing about the RNC or Trump's TeaParty. Only the DNC and Clinton. What's with that?
An attack on the USA, that's what. The people and the political process. And further more, the Republicans are encouraging yet more such attacks. To me, that is yet more reason to never vote for a Republican again. They are actively promoting attacks on the USA because they are more partisan than patriotic.
Tom

It's really only on a few select people though, not an entire party, and not on the public.
"Attack" is a strong word, tends to get people overly-emotional in my opinion.

 

[Lighthouse]

So should all criminal investigations henceforth be suspended just because it's an election cycle?

Hell no. Very weak excuse. Tries to take the attention away from the root.

Looks like that's the road being taken now, blame Comey rather than the root.

 

[Revoltingest]

I would be fine with Wikileaks if they weren't so partisan and antiUSA.

I can understand seeing them as anti-USA.
But I think they're a great service to us.

Don't say anything on the internet that you would be embarrassed to have made public.

You got that right!

But it didn't happen that way. Nothing from Wikileaks about Russian secrets or Chinese or Ecuadorians.
Now, nothing about the RNC or Trump's TeaParty. Only the DNC and Clinton. What's with that?
An attack on the USA, that's what. The people and the political process. And further more, the Republicans are encouraging yet more such attacks. To me, that is yet more reason to never vote for a Republican again. They are actively promoting attacks on the USA because they are more partisan than patriotic.
Tom

Every party has someone arching them.
The RNC has NPR, etc.
The DNC has Wikileaks, etc.

 

[idav]

I can understand seeing them as anti-USA. I
But I think they're a great service to us.

You got that right!

Every party has someone arching them.
The RNC has NPR, etc.
The DNC has Wikileaks, etc.

NPR is just media, not corporate level espionage. I wouldn't encourage on either side unless its non-partisan. They've had this information for months but instead of releasing the information chose to rig the election with it. Thats the issue. I had much more respect for wikileaks until they pulled this stuff. They could have just released the stuff since they had it instead of goating people the whole time, waiting til weeks and days before the day of the election. Its not like the RNC doesn't pull stuff, lets not act naive. They've also been hacked before.

 

[Revoltingest]

NPR is just media

They're not just any media.
They were created by government, & are largely funded by them.

.....not corporate level espionage. I wouldn't encourage on either side unless its non-partisan. They've had this information for months but instead of releasing the information chose to rig the election with it. Thats the issue. I had much more respect for wikileaks until they pulled this stuff. They could have just released the stuff since they had it instead of goating people the whole time, waiting til weeks and days before the day of the election. Its not like the RNC doesn't pull stuff, lets not act naive. They've also been hacked before.

Wikileaks has no obligation to be non-partisan.
Same as the Koch Bros or George Soros.
And they've uncovered some really corrupt practices of the DNC to rig the primaries.

 

[idav]

They're not just any media.
They were created by government, & are largely funded by them.

Wikileaks has no obligation to be non-partisan.
Same as the Koch Bros or George Soros.
And they've uncovered some really corrupt practices of the DNC to rig the primaries.

Truth is non--partisan.

 

[Revoltingest]

Truth is non--partisan.

I'm not so sure.
It might depend upon which truth is withheld, which truth is divulged,
the timing thereof, & is it on whole wheat or rye?

 

[Lyndon]

They're not just any media.
They were created by government, & are largely funded by them.

Wikileaks has no obligation to be non-partisan.
Same as the Koch Bros or George Soros.
And they've uncovered some really corrupt practices of the DNC to rig the primaries.

BS only about 2% of NPRs funding comes from the federal government, not exactly "largely funded by".