Does Wikileaks have anything more on DNC/HRC/etc megethread

[ApatheticAustrian]

if i would be part of WL i would publish all at once and stop the editorializing.

drip drip drip and commentary kills their creed.

[Fargobison]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/789574436219449345

[Speed of Sound]

You're not a true terrorist group until you take credit for things you're not responsible for. Good work, wikileaks.

[Dr. Arch]

You're not a true terrorist group until you take credit for things you're not responsible for. Good work, wikileaks.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

[Kalimantan]

Its a fair point, and certainly WL should be intrinsically popular on the Left. It just seems like they have gone from exposing government wherever they can, to becoming a partisan hack. If your motivation is to get the truth out there, why drip feed it instead of dumping it all in one go; why build it up - tweeting about how next week 'we're going to expose Hillary's lies' - that's electioneering grandstanding, there's no need for commentary, let the media do that - and by turning off many on the Left its self-defeating, they're pissing off one of their biggest constituencies.

And if they'd done the same to Bush then the Left would have celebrated and the Right been turned off - if WL wants to be taken seriously by all it shouldn't take this editorializing stance, imho

It is not how WL works. WL is sort of media canal for "illegal, anonymous hackers". They don't to choose who they will hack. They get information from hackers; now, probably, from Russian hackers. What should they do to be "balanced"? Wait until Mexican hackers hack Trump?

I don't know about DNC leak, but WL usually dumps a large part/almost everything of the information they've got from the hackers. Eventually.  https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html
So as I said they are just a "service". They give opportunity for hackers to publish information about  elites without being killed/tortured in Guantanamo. But yeah, "bad" guys can use WL in their own interests, like Russians now. But it is not a good reason to NOT publish this information. The information doesn't get "evil" if it is leaked by evil hackers.

On-Topic: the probability that they've got a game-changer is <1%. But they will harm Clintons/establishment. Enough for me

If you're just releasing documents given to you by a government agency then you're hardly an anti-establishment organisation are you. If the idea is to promote clear, transparent, fair governance, then being a mouthpiece of the Russians is an interesting angle to take.

[Fargobison]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

https://twitter.com/wikileaks/status/789582613132480514

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Its a fair point, and certainly WL should be intrinsically popular on the Left. It just seems like they have gone from exposing government wherever they can, to becoming a partisan hack. If your motivation is to get the truth out there, why drip feed it instead of dumping it all in one go; why build it up - tweeting about how next week 'we're going to expose Hillary's lies' - that's electioneering grandstanding, there's no need for commentary, let the media do that - and by turning off many on the Left its self-defeating, they're pissing off one of their biggest constituencies.

And if they'd done the same to Bush then the Left would have celebrated and the Right been turned off - if WL wants to be taken seriously by all it shouldn't take this editorializing stance, imho

It is not how WL works. WL is sort of media canal for "illegal, anonymous hackers". They don't to choose who they will hack. They get information from hackers; now, probably, from Russian hackers. What should they do to be "balanced"? Wait until Mexican hackers hack Trump?

I don't know about DNC leak, but WL usually dumps a large part/almost everything of the information they've got from the hackers. Eventually.  https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html
So as I said they are just a "service". They give opportunity for hackers to publish information about  elites without being killed/tortured in Guantanamo. But yeah, "bad" guys can use WL in their own interests, like Russians now. But it is not a good reason to NOT publish this information. The information doesn't get "evil" if it is leaked by evil hackers.

On-Topic: the probability that they've got a game-changer is <1%. But they will harm Clintons/establishment. Enough for me

If you're just releasing documents given to you by a government agency then you're hardly an anti-establishment organisation are you. If the idea is to promote clear, transparent, fair governance, then being a mouthpiece of the Russians is an interesting angle to take.

You're talking again about the deliever, and don't care about the message. As long as information is authentic, it should be published. No?

And when I'm reading your post, I get a feeling that WL released only stuff handed by [probably] Russians. But no, they likely released all leaks they've got. https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html

[Person Man]

If Trump wins, J. Ass gets his pardon. If Hillary wins, Wikileaks gets its name on the terror list.

[Southern Delegate matthew27]

If Trump wins, J. Ass gets his pardon. If Hillary wins, Wikileaks gets its name on the terror list.

And messing with the American peoples internet service is a big mistake if he wishes for Trump to win. The American people don't like that.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

[Dr. Arch]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Trump says everything is rigged.  Clinton blames everything on the Russians.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

I think the wage gap is pure BS but this is pretty damn hilarious and hypocritical:

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/wikileaks-clinton-foundation-paid-women-less-men/

[Dr. Arch]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Trump says everything is rigged.  Clinton blames everything on the Russians.

I literally said nothing about HRC or Trump in that response.

[Rules for me, but not for thee]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Trump says everything is rigged.  Clinton blames everything on the Russians.

I literally said nothing about HRC or Trump in that response.

Fine, I'm a libertarian. Do you really expect me to take what the government says at face value?

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Why is it OK to get money from dictators and use them in philanthropic purpose (Clinton Foundation), but it is not OK to get information from Russians and use them to expose corrupt politicians (Wikileaks)?

[Dr. Arch]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Why is it OK to get money from dictators and use them in philanthropic purpose (Clinton Foundation), but it is not OK to get information from Russians and use them to expose corrupt politicians (Wikileaks)?

It's okay because the money is used for the general good of people in the world, regardless of where it comes from so long as it's obtained by legal means.

It's not okay to function as a wing of a foreign government that is aggressive towards the target, releasing information obtained through cyber-attacks that may or may not be accurate. It's even more-so not okay when you do it under the guise that you're some sort of freedom fighting organization, when you're clearly acting partisan.

They would've attempted to obtain Trump's tax records, for instance, if they really wanted to, but that's not their goal. They've been reduced to a Russian propaganda machine attempting to undermine the US election so that Russia may obtain a better standing in the world by weakening the US.

[Person Man]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Why is it OK to get money from dictators and use them in philanthropic purpose (Clinton Foundation), but it is not OK to get information from Russians and use them to expose corrupt politicians (Wikileaks)?

Because the latter is illegal. Next. Besides, if an asshole wants to make the world a better place, who are we to stop them? The entire alt-right meme about inner city rioters try to get what they want moot.

[Person Man]

Wikileaks has NOTHING and yet they attack the US? They're enemies of this nation and this will just make more Americans want to vote for Clinton more.

Supporters, not necessarily Wikileaks themselves.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I can agree with them on this ^^^

They should stop colluding with Russia to interfere with our election then. If they want to be the freedom fighters they purported to be, they should have used individual sources, not the Russian government, effectively acting as a wing of their cyber-terror efforts.

"The action came after U.S. officials conveyed their conclusion that Assange is a willing participant in a Russian intelligence operation to undermine the U.S. presidential election, NBC News has learned. U.S. intelligence officials believe Assange knows he is getting the information from Russian intelligence, though they do not believe he is involved in helping plan the hacking, officials told NBC. "

Why is it OK to get money from dictators and use them in philanthropic purpose (Clinton Foundation), but it is not OK to get information from Russians and use them to expose corrupt politicians (Wikileaks)?

It's okay because the money is used for the general good of people in the world, regardless of where it comes from so long as it's obtained by legal means.

It's not okay to function as a wing of a foreign government that is aggressive towards the target, releasing information obtained through cyber-attacks that may or may not be accurate. It's even more-so not okay when you do it under the guise that you're some sort of freedom fighting organization, when you're clearly acting partisan.

They would've attempted to obtain Trump's tax records, for instance, if they really wanted to, but that's not their goal. They've been reduced to a Russian propaganda machine attempting to undermine the US election so that Russia may obtain a better standing in the world by weakening the US.

People just want to burn it down and don't care who they hurt. Even if they themselves are killed as a consequence. Its like a white-collar Ferguson times a million.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Because the latter is illegal. Next. Besides, if an asshole wants to make the world a better place, who are we to stop them? The entire alt-right meme about inner city rioters try to get what they want moot.

It's okay because the money is used for the general good of people in the world, regardless of where it comes from so long as it's obtained by legal means.

Guys, you know who dictators are and what they do? SA, Qatar etc... It kind of ok to rape women overthere...

It's not okay to function as a wing of a foreign government that is aggressive towards the target, releasing information obtained through cyber-attacks that may or may not be accurate. It's even more-so not okay when you do it under the guise that you're some sort of freedom fighting organization, when you're clearly acting partisan.

WL have so far never faked their data. If this they did it, they would easily exposed. I repeat EASILY.
Aggressive? 95% of their action is just actually publishing the data and hosting.
5% trolling in Twitter. Wouldn't call it aggressive. And yeah, they have always been that way (more or less) even when they published data about USA:s actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those days they were heroes, at least in Europe

They would've attempted to obtain Trump's tax records, for instance, if they really wanted to, but that's not their goal. They've been reduced to a Russian propaganda machine attempting to undermine the US election so that Russia may obtain a better standing in the world by weakening the US.

Um, no. They are not hackers. They get data, publish it and hold hackers back. That is the reason why hackers give them data and not for example media. Obama would press media and hackers would be droned, but Assange has balls. He and Snowden live a [relatively] miserable lives, but not giving up

Les misarables

[Dr. Arch]

Because the latter is illegal. Next. Besides, if an asshole wants to make the world a better place, who are we to stop them? The entire alt-right meme about inner city rioters try to get what they want moot.

It's okay because the money is used for the general good of people in the world, regardless of where it comes from so long as it's obtained by legal means.

Guys, you know who dictators are and what they do? SA, Qatar etc... It kind of ok to rape women overthere...

It's not okay to function as a wing of a foreign government that is aggressive towards the target, releasing information obtained through cyber-attacks that may or may not be accurate. It's even more-so not okay when you do it under the guise that you're some sort of freedom fighting organization, when you're clearly acting partisan.

WL have so far never faked their data. If this they did it, they would easily exposed. I repeat EASILY.
Aggressive? 95% of their action is just actually publishing the data and hosting.
5% trolling in Twitter. Wouldn't call it aggressive. And yeah, they have always been that way (more or less) even when they published data about USA:s actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. Those days they were heroes, at least in Europe

They would've attempted to obtain Trump's tax records, for instance, if they really wanted to, but that's not their goal. They've been reduced to a Russian propaganda machine attempting to undermine the US election so that Russia may obtain a better standing in the world by weakening the US.

Um, no. They are not hackers. They get data, publish it and hold hackers back. That is the reason why hackers give them data and not for example media. Obama would press media and hackers would be droned, but Assange has balls. He and Snowden live a [relatively] miserable lives, but not giving up

Les misarables

Not to mention they editorialize the information they put out instead of letting people understand the information. Their organization is clearly slanted against the US. Why trust them when they're publishing and editorializing information that we KNOW was stolen by Russian cyber-attacks? No.

[Erich Maria Remarque]

Not to mention they editorialize the information they put out instead of letting people understand the information. Their organization is clearly slanted against the US. Why trust them when they're publishing and editorializing information that we KNOW was stolen by Russian cyber-attacks? No.

As I said they are media for hackers. Why do media sometimes say that they will tomorrow release intresting polls in battleground states instead of letting people understand the information? The same to WL.

But in the end they just released this information, and you can search it, mail by mail. So what's wrong. They have so far released more than 10mln emails about everything (Syrian, Guantanamo, US in Iraq, US in Afghanistan etc) https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html

No, they are against corrupt (as they think) system in USA.

We don't know. But OK. It was Russians, so what? Does information becomes less worth?


This conversation goes nowhere, so my last attempt is an extreme example:
Let's imagine, Mexican hackers hacked Trump and handed it to WL. Would it be OK publish it?
No? Even if they founded evidence that proved Trump is Putin's puppet? But the publication would interfer the election, right?

[Person Man]

Not to mention they editorialize the information they put out instead of letting people understand the information. Their organization is clearly slanted against the US. Why trust them when they're publishing and editorializing information that we KNOW was stolen by Russian cyber-attacks? No.

As I said they are media for hackers. Why do media sometimes say that they will tomorrow release intresting polls in battleground states instead of letting people understand the information? The same to WL.

But in the end they just released this information, and you can search it, mail by mail. So what's wrong. They have so far released more than 10mln emails about everything (Syrian, Guantanamo, US in Iraq, US in Afghanistan etc) https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html

No, they are against corrupt (as they think) system in USA.

We don't know. But OK. It was Russians, so what? Does information becomes less worth?


This conversation goes nowhere, so my last attempt is an extreme example:
Let's imagine, Mexican hackers hacked Trump and handed it to WL. Would it be OK publish it?
No? Even if they founded evidence that proved Trump is Putin's puppet? But the publication would interfer the election, right?

We would still try to stop us from being Mexico's puppet.

[Dr. Arch]

Not to mention they editorialize the information they put out instead of letting people understand the information. Their organization is clearly slanted against the US. Why trust them when they're publishing and editorializing information that we KNOW was stolen by Russian cyber-attacks? No.

As I said they are media for hackers. Why do media sometimes say that they will tomorrow release intresting polls in battleground states instead of letting people understand the information? The same to WL.

But in the end they just released this information, and you can search it, mail by mail. So what's wrong. They have so far released more than 10mln emails about everything (Syrian, Guantanamo, US in Iraq, US in Afghanistan etc) https://wikileaks.org/-Leaks-.html

No, they are against corrupt (as they think) system in USA.

We don't know. But OK. It was Russians, so what? Does information becomes less worth?


This conversation goes nowhere, so my last attempt is an extreme example:
Let's imagine, Mexican hackers hacked Trump and handed it to WL. Would it be OK publish it?
No? Even if they founded evidence that proved Trump is Putin's puppet? But the publication would interfer the election, right?

No, it wouldn't be okay. It's still downright criminal and the work of foreign espionage and propaganda.