Greenwald has been quite vocal in his support of Assange. The other article cites an unnamed CIA figure to counter unnamed sources of the Guardian. It’s quite possible we won’t get the full story at this point, but may get a full accounting in years or decades to come.
2 Likes
Might want to look at the conclusions you jump to and the sources you get those from.
You don’t even consider it, you just lump criticism into some Q Anon action.
That’s very dangerous.
No, but no other news source has confirmed it at all. NONE. 7 months later.
I made an error in my original post and got it confused with the Buzzfeed article, that is the one Mueller came out and denied during investigation not The Guardian one.
But in regards to The Guardian article, almost no one points out that Luke Harding was peddling his Collusion book while writing these articles.
While I despise Trump (seems like you have to say that because if you don’t the labeling instantly happens) I’m in the camp that the cynical DNC are using Cold War era-Russia hysteria in reporting on this story. It’s dangerous and misleading. Point the finger at anyone but themselves. That’s something to be suspicious of.
3 Likes
Likewise, be careful about lumping someone else, who at least has one source to back up their assertion, with Q Anon, when your opposing assertion also has only one source, and it’s weak sauce at that.
Caution = good policy. But insisting that someone is wrong without really bringing any compelling evidence isn’t a good look.
7 Likes
Do a few lines. Interfere in some elections. Party time.
2 Likes
I guess just blithely asserting
“The first place to look at the failure of Clinton to win is the DNC.”
is some of that non-dangerous conclusion jumping you’re talking about.
4 Likes
If you ignore everything the DNC is saying, you still have the head of every US spy agency saying Russia interfered with our election, and Trump, at best, trusting Putin’s word that they didn’t over US intelligence, and making the appearance, at least, of doing nothing about it. Spy agencies don’t skew liberal. They don’t really care what the DNC thinks or says. If they were in the tank for Hilary, they could easily have swayed the election. Trump’s bizarre behavior at Helsinki could, perhaps, be “innocently” explained by the onset of dementia, as gullibility is often a symptom. So maybe it’s not collusion, but the alternatives are not great either. If you’re not incredibly alarmed by this state of affairs, you should be.
10 Likes
Isn’t Wikileaks supposed to be more than just Assange? Why would he need to be the crucial IT/network admin with the fancy hardware, while trapped in the Ecuadorian embassy??? Wouldn’t there be a more appropriate person and place somewhere in the Wikileaks network outside the embassy?
It all has a very Mission Impossible CIA computer room vibe to it.
2 Likes
Wait until he finds out that the Ecuadorian security officer was a creepy perv a very careful worker.
Wasn’t that fake news?
Have you noticed how much of what we “know” from the MSM comes from “anonymous officials”?
1 Like
So…
Meeting in the bathroom to try to have a private conversation: creepy.
Being under 24/7 surveillance everywhere else: not creepy at all.
Got it.
1 Like
I didn’t do that. You misread what I wrote or read it out of context to the response. A previous poster asserted that next I’d be making Seth Rich conspiracy claims, rather than actually addressing my comments.
I don’t know what the “spy agency” stuff is that you’re referring to here.
I don’t doubt that outside agents to the US try to interfere with our elections. Hell look at Israel.
Of all the things one could look at to say what caused the election outcome, the number one thing is Clinton herself and the DNC. It was people voting for Trump that was the problem, it was people not voting, particularly people who previously voted Obama.
I also don’t know why we all of a sudden trust US spy organizations to tell us the truth.
And just in time, one of my favorite skeptical authors on this topic:
https://steemit.com/news/@caitlinjohnstone/new-cnn-assange-smear-piece-is-amazingly-dishonest-even-for-cnn
“It’s not until paragraph [43]and [46], long after most people have stopped reading, that the articles authors bother to inform their readers that the “hackers” in question are German and have [no established connection] to the Russian government whatsoever.”
2 Likes
Optical character recognition is always useful–but it’s a somewhat demanding on the cpu.
1 Like
Johnson, Clapper, Comey and Pompeo.
2 Likes
I suspect they mean the Assessing Russian Activities and Intentions
in Recent US Elections report produced by FBI, CIA, and NSA for ODNI. It’s not every intelligence agency as was once misreported, but as I doubt the likes of DoE had much to contribute it is by all the relevant ones. One of the report’s “key judgments” is:
We assess Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered an influence campaign in 2016 aimed at the US presidential election. Russia’s goals were to undermine public faith in the US democratic process, denigrate Secretary Clinton, and harm her electability and potential presidency. We further assess Putin and the Russian Government developed a clear preference for President-elect Trump. (bold in original)
You are correct, a hack and leak intended to stir up intra-party animosity combined with a black propaganda social media campaign designed to depress Democratic voter turn-out absolutely cannot explain why Obama voters failed to show up in 2016.
4 Likes
Yes, I’m aware that reporters protect sources. I’m also aware that we’d get a lot less news if they didn’t.
The sources are known to the reporters. We wouldn’t have any investigative journalism if reporters couldn’t protect their sources.
(Why would anyone against the concept of giving anonymity to sources support WikiLeaks, anyway?)
5 Likes
2 Likes
Assange’s alleged complicity in Russian interference in the 2016 US election is backed by circumstantial evidence that should be met with healthy skepticism, but not dismissed or handwaved away because the DNC is corrupt.
QAnon is a batshit conspiracy utterly divorced from reality and promulgated by grifters and marks with the functional intelligence of vegetables.
There is no comparison.
8 Likes
