Julian Assange: I Will Bring Hillary Down Before The Debate Stage On September 26th

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Konduit

God I hope so. I dont care how butt hurt and bitter her supporters will be. This is all too much. She will get us all killed or just be the cherry on top of the most corrupt period in American politics...which will cause a revolt and get us all killed.

Ghost of Kennedy, hear our call. Make these bastards pay.

Save our people.

I 2nd that , Mr.Kennedy,fire at will Sir.Make the bastards pay three-fold.

a reply to: Cosmocow

Ahh okay, thanks for clarifying that!!!

I watched the full interview between Assange and Rattansi when it was released, and i do not recall any claim, from the former, that he would bring Hillary Clinton down. Indeed, the alleged quotes in the OP only go back about four days at most.

I suspect this to be another case of the media (deliberately?) misquoting Assange. Indeed, most of the hyperbolic language attributed to Assange over the last couple of months never came from his mouth. Assange speaks very specifically, and any amount of research and careful evaluation of his statements almost always show that these exaggerated topics rarely reflect what was actually said. A recent example of this was the media's allegations about Assange implying that Seth Rich was a source. He never made such a claim and an official WikiLeaks statement made it clear that nothing should be taken to suggest such theories.

I urge all of you to actually do some research and not jump on a hype train fueled by propaganda.

The government has been hiding information since the government became the government. Why would we all of a sudden suggest that Assange is the good guy?

a reply to: carewemust


(Or his goal isn't really to bring her down - but to destabilize and delegitimize the election of our President for the one who pulls his strings...Putin?

I'm sorry to interject a different opinion than the Hillary-Hate but perhaps people would consider an alternate theory?
Isn't the damage done merely by innuendo and hype and "interviews" and "hearings" and "body count innuendo" without there NEEDING to be legally binding substance? Is she really "teflon Clinton" or is the entire playbook of the Republicans/Alt-Right "smear and it will stick even if the # ain't hers?"

I submit you see in her what you WANT to see, conveniently fomented by her enemies. We ALL do. I have my own bias as well, so it is easier for me to see out of the Hillary=bad equation that most here seem to have. I would be more critical of her if there wasn't such an obviously heavy tilt in the other direction. I feel the need to provide some balance.

Would people on this site carry the banner of "she's-guilty-no-matter-what-and-this-confirms-it-again-even-if-nothing-comes-of-it-because-the-system-is-rigged-and-corrupt-and-Hillary!!"

This IS a CT site, no? Putin wins the cold war through wikileaks...yeah...but carry on with the pitchfork sharpening.)

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: carewemust


(Or his goal isn't really to bring her down - but to destabilize and delegitimize the election of our President for the one who pulls his strings...Putin?

Or maybe he just published newsworthy material which was leaked to him... You know, just doing his job.

originally posted by: AboveBoard
a reply to: carewemust


(Or his goal isn't really to bring her down - but to destabilize and delegitimize the election of our President for the one who pulls his strings...Putin?

I'm sorry to interject a different opinion than the Hillary-Hate but perhaps people would consider an alternate theory?
Isn't the damage done merely by innuendo and hype and "interviews" and "hearings" and "body count innuendo" without there NEEDING to be legally binding substance? Is she really "teflon Clinton" or is the entire playbook of the Republicans/Alt-Right "smear and it will stick even if the # ain't hers?"

I submit you see in her what you WANT to see, conveniently fomented by her enemies. We ALL do. I have my own bias as well, so it is easier for me to see out of the Hillary=bad equation that most here seem to have. I would be more critical of her if there wasn't such an obviously heavy tilt in the other direction. I feel the need to provide some balance.

Would people on this site carry the banner of "she's-guilty-no-matter-what-and-this-confirms-it-again-even-if-nothing-comes-of-it-because-the-system-is-rigged-and-corrupt-and-Hillary!!"

This IS a CT site, no? Putin wins the cold war through wikileaks...yeah...but carry on with the pitchfork sharpening.)

It's a theory and not impossible in my view, however the claim that people see what they want to see is somewhat odd. What people are seeing is what is actually happening - i.e. Assange saying he is going to release documents about Hillary. His motivations are unseen and have not really been discussed much. Perhaps you are seeing want you want to see? Do you have any evidence that Assange is league with Putin to bring down the US govt?

Just release it now and bring her down. Why wait?

a reply to: Konduit

Here is the issue..

Assange is effectively working with and courting Russia now.

He wants out of his cubby-hole prison in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and Russia has already given Snowden a safe refuge. They are his best hope.

Meanwhile his last leak of the DNC Emails, which was poorly screened and edited before release...was clearly and indisputably given to him by Russian Intelligence Hackers.

That is not a political assessment...non-partisan, independent hackers and security firms have dug into the leaked material and literally found Russian Intelligence signatures on the docs that Russian Intelligence forgot to edit out before handing over to Assange.

Which leads us to the next leak...

Democrats' new warning: Leaks could include Russian lies

Last month, a bipartisan group of 32 national security experts at the Aspen Institute Homeland Security Group warned of a specific type of fakery following the DNC hack, arguing that the suspected Russian hackers who struck the DNC and the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee could “salt the files they release with plausible forgeries.”

www.politico.com...

NOW...Of course anti-Hilary folks will say that is BS and the upcoming leaks are fully accurate if they scuttle her chances as an "October Surprise". And it's possible that the leaks will contain fabrications...or it's possible they will be true...

BUT...as far as the idea that the FBI and Justice can fully verify the leaks are not fabricated in parts? In time for the election? That won't happen. That is a huge undertaking to chase down the origin of the leaks and subpoena other peoples email records and review it all to make sure it is accurate.

So logically the timeline will not afford for verification of the leaks and verification will be absolutely a pre-requisite for any charges or indictment....more so when working with evidence provided by Russian Hackers aimed at messing with a US election.

Best case that Hillary haters can hope for is very bad headlines, but no..logically the timeline will not afford for any charges or indictments. The FBI wont be able to prove or disprove the content of the leak quickly enough given the nature and origin.

At this stage Russia can hand Assange anything they like, true or not, for leaking. He has no way to verify.

usanewshome? And Assange actually said he promises to bring down Hillary. Sounds like a load of horsesh#t. Show me the video where he said such a thing. This is just like the other bogus quote where he supposedly said Hillary would be arrested.

He never said this. Send to Hoax forum.

originally posted by: BrokedownChevy
Just release it now and bring her down. Why wait?

If they release now...it affords more time for investigation and disproving the content as false.

Releasing later and close to debates or voting day...earns the hit in headlines value without the follow-up analysis for veracity.

I...and various security and intelligence analysts (plus the Dems of course) think the Leak will be doctored to try and torpedo Clinton.

Timing matters there...Too early and it can be debunked..

Timed right...debunking can't fully occur as people sort through it..but neither can charges occur as FBI works to verify or debunk.

If it was literally a smoking gun...Assange/Russia would release immediately to afford time for the FBI to investigate before November.

originally posted by: BestinShow

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: Konduit
It appears Jesus has heard my prayers.

Two wrongs don't make a right...

Classic. surprised it didn't garner more stars than it has gotten. maybe not everyone got it.
btw, going through your post history is a great time killer.

Aspen Institute
www.prnewswire.com...

It is not unthinkable that those responsible will steal and release more files, and even salt the files they release with plausible forgeries.

How Putin Weaponized Wikileaks to Influence the Election of an American President
www.defenseone.com...

a reply to: Indigo5

Ahh so that's the strategy to protect Clinton. Plausible deniability. "They "might" be Russian lies, so kindly ignore please."

originally posted by: Indigo5
Aspen Institute
www.prnewswire.com...

It is not unthinkable that those responsible will steal and release more files, and even salt the files they release with plausible forgeries.

How Putin Weaponized Wikileaks to Influence the Election of an American President
www.defenseone.com...

Speculative article with no evidence. It's a conspiracy theory, which might have some merit but maybe not.

Assange is such an attention wh0re. Why pussyfoot the issue and build his cache before releasing anything.

Everyone has their own agendas... even the Robin hood vigilantes....

The first release was not the newtonian match to $Shillary's deeds, nor will the next.

Those above and beyond Assange allow Hill to be, unfortunately, so she still remains.

Enough publicity stunts Assange.

originally posted by: BrokedownChevy
Just release it now and bring her down. Why wait?

Lots of reasons to wait. Whatever he is releasing came from someone- somewhere. That person might not be in a body bag yet, and they might need a couple weeks before they can safely get out. They probably have more information to share once they're safely out- and most people who aren't corrupt government types don't want to shoot the messenger.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Indigo5

Ahh so that's the strategy to protect Clinton. Plausible deniability. "They "might" be Russian lies, so kindly ignore please."

Again...those are the facts.
Whether or not the next leak contains fabricated content...that will need to be verified by FBI or Justice before any charges.
Yes, it is and will be politically convenient for the Clinton campaign to claim the leak is fabricated.
Yes, it is entirely plausible the content will be fabricated by Russian Intelligence.
It is also plausible it will be fully accurate.
BUT the truthfulness will not be able to be determined by the FBI or public before the election if the leak occurs right before debates or voting.

Which leads me to ask the question...If it is so damning, why doesn't Assange release it now? So that the Public and FBI has time to investigate and verify?

The obvious answer to me is that the Russian Hackers have refused to give Assange everything, or made him promise to wait, in order to have maximum headline impact plus minimum verification.

No offense...but I am offering logic...your post is offering empty snark.

a reply to: Indigo5

Of course, it's the Russians.

Are you not tired of blaming the evil communists for everything in the 60 years? It wouldn't possibly be true, that there are some honorable and honest people in Democratic party...it must be the Russians going after the US, by exposing the TRUTH

This whole thing is fake. Assange didn't say this.

Carry on.