It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

BOOM. Trump - WikiLeaks Connection Confirmed By Trump "Advisor," Manafort Partner, Roger Stone

page: 4
24
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 03:44 AM
link   
a reply to: daaskapital


And? You're spreading propaganda to discredit a legitimate media organisation while promoting your candidate of choice. Assange being Australian doesn't negate the truth found in his leaks.

Assange doesn't like Clinton, that is true, but can you point out a quote, made by Assange and captured on video or WikiLeaks channels, stating of a personal vendetta?


He's effectively stateless at this point. The rest of that isn't worth responding to. I do however have a video and a quote. Starting at about 6:12 in the below video he's asked a question.



Relevant bit from answer:

"from my personal perspective, well you know the emails we published show that Hillary Clinton is receiving constant updates about my personal situation she has uh pushed for the prosecution of WikiLeaks which is still in [training?] so we do see her as a bit of a problem for the press as general"


He's compared Trump and Clinton to diseases. WikiLeaks is restrained by the material the are provided. Besides, if transparency exposed through leaks influences your election, then it's a good thing. It informs the public and exposes the true nature of those running for office.


Picking winners by exposing one and ignoring the other isn't transparency and it isn't a public service. It's just one more asshole playing games and wielding influence without accountability.


He probably shouldn't be believed. Sure, he had involvement with WikiLeaks, and was probably more active than the organisation lets on, but he is also reported to be a liar. Let's not forget that he embezzled money from WikiLeaks and other organisations. He also spied on them for the FBI. He is currently serving time in a maximum security prison for economic and sex crimes.


No, it was just WikiLeaks AFAIK. I don't believe he took the time to go back and manufacture false logs with Sabu but maybe he lied to Sabu. He went to the FBI, that's true. He gave them a bunch of drives of data too. Yes, he is incarcerated for paying for sex with a teen prostitute I believe? Regardless, Assange/WikiLeaks definitely tried to minimize his involvement and discredit him.


They do much more than release the documents to the public. They have to reorganise them into readable formats, catalogue them, and contact media agencies about them. I'm sure they do much more.


I wasn't talking about logistics lol.

Here's an interesting article from The Intercept which was co-founded and is I believe 1/3 owned by Glenn Grenwald. I think you'll find it interesting.




posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 03:55 AM
link   
a reply to: theantediluvian

There's that narcissistic snark I know and love!!

I doubted the site myself and couldn't find anything to back it up.

Question is still not answered.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 08:36 AM
link   
I think there are many deplorable and irredeemable American females out their like HC to smear and discredit DT for money and fane



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 08:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: slider1982
What a shame that presidential candidates that are running for office in what is regarded as the most powerful nation on earth have to resort to this BS and the only way they feel they can win is to muddy the other persons name..

How has the U.S. got into this situation, do you not have a single honest good person that is capable of winning and leading a country on merit???..


RA


Simply put, progressive ideology over the last 10 years. It started in 2006 when the left took control of Congress and said no to everything Bush pushed for, and continued with the obama administration. Now here we are.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: JetBlackStare

originally posted by: knoxie

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: theantediluvian

Even if Wikileaks is corrupt, they still serve an important service.

A corrupt wikileaks is exposing the dishonesty of only one side.
A non corrupt wikileaks exposes dishonesty on both sides.
No wikileaks exposes no dishonesty.

Until they are shown to release false information which hasn't happened yet it's irrelevant.
A corrupt wikileaks is better than no wikileaks.



because only exposing one side is a form of propaganda.


This is my big problem and why it's hard to dismiss Wikileaks as a Russian OP. If it was legit, it would unleash the Kraken on the entire #ing corrupt system. Maybe it was something once, now it seems to be a tool for destabilizing the West.


And that is not what the Left was saying when WikiLeaks was active during GW Bush's term.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Yes of course, but they don't like it when something reflects negatively on their peeps...

There's a reason Trump's hot mic comment wasn't released in 2005. He was a democrat back then, and hanging out with the Clinton's. There's a reason none of those women he supposedly sexually assaulted came out when he assaulted them.

And of course, there's a reason all of that is suddenly coming out now. Because nobody cared about what Trump said before he was a Republican. After that comment, Hillary took advantage and paid off some women to claim Trump tried to grab their canooters.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 10:44 AM
link   
a reply to: flice

That's funny, I was JUST thinking the same exact thing last night....about dividing the percentage of electoral votes up. Doesn't seem fair to give all to one. I really REALLY like that idea and I can see why democrats do not.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: LSU0408

Back then, he was just an egotistical rich guy with lawyers to control opposition from average people. Now he is a candidate for president.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Yeah with the content released, is it a big surprise they aren't Hillary supporters?

Big surprise



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 12:20 PM
link   
Yeah with the content released, is it a big surprise they aren't Hillary supporters?

Big surprise



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: theantediluvian

There's that narcissistic snark I know and love!!

I doubted the site myself and couldn't find anything to back it up.

Question is still not answered.


What question needs to be answered. I haven't found any evidence that it was known that WikiLeaks had hacked Podesta emails to release when Roger Stone claimed to know that it was the next big release. If YOU have something that shows otherwise, I'll be willing to admit it (as I've already demonstrated this only to discover that you'd tried some shenanigans!).

So let's see it?



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: theantediluvian

There's that narcissistic snark I know and love!!

I doubted the site myself and couldn't find anything to back it up.

Question is still not answered.


What question needs to be answered. I haven't found any evidence that it was known that WikiLeaks had hacked Podesta emails to release when Roger Stone claimed to know that it was the next big release. If YOU have something that shows otherwise, I'll be willing to admit it (as I've already demonstrated this only to discover that you'd tried some shenanigans!).

So let's see it?


Fair enough of a response. I'll chalk it up to unconfirmed then.

I brought my post to you to see if it was legit, not to discredit you btw. We both realized they had the date wrong no?



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:23 PM
link   
a reply to: Greggers

Exactly so why make such big deals out of everything that comes out of Trump's mouth? My point is that the media is pounding Trump for every little thing he says but completely ignoring everything that Clinton says in her emails which includes badmouthing catholics and referring to people as "sand n*ggers". It's hypocritical if you ask me. You seem like a sensible person, would you not agree?



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:25 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

I can agree with that. I can't say positively that there wasn't some source other than WL from which Podesta could have gotten that. It's possible that he read it in a Twitter rumor somewhere. He might be a good guesser.

I still maintain that his admitting to having a connection to WL is not something that should be dismissed. Have you read up at all on Roger Stone? He's the real deal. Unfortunately, he's also a paid liar for hire and an actual disinfo agent so you never really know when he's telling the truth.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
(IMO) Clinton paid for release of the groping tape, followed by a parade of well-paid groping accusers.




And yet Hillary kept her hands clean and all the Trump-accusers went directly to the media themselves. Meanwhile, Trump parades Bill's accusers at the debate and at that press conference -- dirtying his hands so bad you'd swear he believed no woman could ever possibly come forward to accuse him of being *cough* 'handsy.'

He effectively neutered your argument and his own BEFOREHAND. He had to have known this was coming.

Am I the only one who finds this to be very well orchestrated to benefit Hillary and with Trump's full cooperation?

At this point, I think it's crystal clear that Trump agreed to be Hillary's opposition -- who is more unlikable than her and more sleazy than Bill. I honestly can't believe how many people still refuse to seriously consider this.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: JinMI

I can agree with that. I can't say positively that there wasn't some source other than WL from which Podesta could have gotten that. It's possible that he read it in a Twitter rumor somewhere. He might be a good guesser.

I still maintain that his admitting to having a connection to WL is not something that should be dismissed. Have you read up at all on Roger Stone? He's the real deal. Unfortunately, he's also a paid liar for hire and an actual disinfo agent so you never really know when he's telling the truth.


Thanks for that.

As it applies to Roger Stone, I have not and that's one of your threads I am looking forward to. I saw the mentions of him in the OP. Honestly however, who in politics or grandstanding for their candidate, is not a paid liar?



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: theantediluvian

Even if Wikileaks is corrupt, they still serve an important service.

A corrupt wikileaks is exposing the dishonesty of only one side.
A non corrupt wikileaks exposes dishonesty on both sides.
No wikileaks exposes no dishonesty.

Until they are shown to release false information which hasn't happened yet it's irrelevant.
A corrupt wikileaks is better than no wikileaks.


Damn.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: Krahzeef_Ukhar
a reply to: theantediluvian

Even if Wikileaks is corrupt, they still serve an important service.

A corrupt wikileaks is exposing the dishonesty of only one side.
A non corrupt wikileaks exposes dishonesty on both sides.
No wikileaks exposes no dishonesty.

Until they are shown to release false information which hasn't happened yet it's irrelevant.
A corrupt wikileaks is better than no wikileaks.


Damn.



posted on Oct, 14 2016 @ 07:52 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye




At this point, I think it's crystal clear that Trump agreed to be Hillary's opposition

far right leaning people loved trumps message, conspiracy theorists loved that he hit their button, telly addicts recognised him from telly, those that don't understand or are bored by politics loved his 'i'm no politician' rhetoric.
they chose him.

clintons preferred opponent would have been jeb bush, too easy.
or carson, she probably would be playing walk like an egyptian at rallies.



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join