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

Assange - Hillary will win and tried to hack Wikileaks

page: 1
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+1 more 
posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 08:54 PM
link   
So this is from an Argentinian conference Assange spoke with via telephone. He states Hillary campaign (or pro-Hillary government) attempted to attack Wikileaks servers.


Assange claimed the release “whipped up a crazed hornet’s nest atmosphere in the Hillary Clinton campaign” leading them to attack WikiLeaks.

“They attacked our servers and attempted hacking attacks and there is an amazing ongoing campaign where state documents were put in the UN and British courts to accuse me of being both a Russian spy and a pedophile,” he added.


He also added that he does not think the Podesta emails will have an impact, adding the influence of MSM pushing Hillary.


The Podesta emails will make no difference to the election result, according to Assange. “I don’t think there’s any chance of Donald Trump winning the election, even with the amazing material we are publishing, because most of the media organizations are strongly aligned with Hillary Clinton,” he said.


sorry this is RT, but many won't cover this

Interesting considering he implied he would have a bombshell before the election.

This whole situation is so hard to read, with talks of Wikileaks being compromised, or pressure on to Ecuador trickling down to Assange.

Just thought I'd share.




posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:10 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

What scares me is that Assange was silent for nearly 2 weeks after his internet was cut off and his first interview was within an Argintine conference.

The Podesta leaks aren't that great. They have provided insight, but nothing that will deliver a TKO.

With that, why the urgency to cut off Assanges internet through the elections? We know that the Ecuadorian president endorsed Hillary at the end of Sept, but if wikileaks had nothing more to offer than the Podesta emails, why silence him?

Imo, they cut off his internet(silenced him) as he carried the wikileaks movement. Since he's been gone, news stations haven't been able to interview him with video. This has given a major blow to wikileaks revelations.

Cable news still carries the majority of voters. Without Assange on tv, wikileaks isn't able to deliver unadulterated news, except through social media.

Cutting off Assanges internet wasn't to prevent leaks, it was to keep people from hearing him.


edit on 27-10-2016 by ghostrager because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:17 PM
link   
Could be a standard red herring.

He might still have the big klobber story coming soon.

These statements put the Hillary people in a better comfort zone for now.




posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:20 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Surely he's not crying foul after someone tried to hack him??

If true, what a gimp.


+15 more 
posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus




Surely he's not crying foul after someone tried to hack him?? If true, what a gimp.


Wikileaks is a publisher. Not a hacker group.

Maybe you don't like what they publish, but that's part of honest journalism. They deal with what they are given.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
Part of me is beginning to think that Assange is dead/captured (the day the internet was cut and heavily armed men were seen outside the embassy).. And his site has been compromised, and to show that he's still "running it" they are still releasing non damning material, to give the impression that he's still running wikileaks, but they are now burying the material that would eventually lead to a Hillary indictment...



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Surely he's not crying foul after someone tried to hack him??

If true, what a gimp.



Maybe, just maybe, he is just stating the facts without ulterior motives. You think?



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

Well Wikileaks doesn't claim to hack, but rather publish.

Also he made a statement. Didn't seem like he had feathers ruffled.

That being said I like what they're doing. Both parties have taken turns praising and hating him as he started against the Bush campaign. Now take a step back and realize it's anti establishment, not partisan.

We have been lied to by our politicians that they are protecting us and our best interests. It should strike us as odd when they try and keep information from us, and let's not kid ourselves, little of what's leaked has harmed us, but rather the racketeering elites.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Chadwickus

What? WikiLeaks never hacked anyone. It sounds like you're more disturbed about Hillary''s duplicity being outed than you are the duplicity itself.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Surely he's not crying foul after someone tried to hack him??

If true, what a gimp.



Also, Hillary calling foul on Assange "interfering" with our election is funny as what he does is reporting facts.

Her and the DNC interfered with the election with Bernie.

What a gimp.
edit on 27-10-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 10:35 PM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

12 days.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 10:36 PM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

They deal with what they are given. By hackers.
Let's not put lipstick on the pig please.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 10:37 PM
link   
Oh, Boo Hoo.

Retaliation.

Shocking!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 10:59 PM
link   
Werent hillary supporters (not naming names) all huffing and puffing and upset because the emails and such about hillary were hacked and therefore not fair? And now its ok, and not a problem that hillary, you know, the one running for president, had her people try and HACK wikileaks?

Im just trying to understand here, is one thing ok, and the other not, are both ok? Im so confused....



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Sillyolme

a reply to: Annee

Our government illegally obtains info on all of us daily.

There is a group that publishes proof of corruption on both sides.

And yet here we are, all divided, and getting bamboozled by the very system we support.

We demonize the wrong entities and look to our corrupt system that cheats the whole world including us.

We got cheated out of Bernie, and we'll be cheated out of anyone anti establishment.

This is what we will get, and we'll pay hanous amounts for our military until we wake up.
edit on 27-10-2016 by CriticalStinker because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Sillyolme

a reply to: Annee

Our government illegally obtains info on all of us daily.

There is a group that publishes proof of corruption on both sides.

And yet here we are, all divided, and getting bamboozled by the very system we support.

We demonize the wrong entities and look to our corrupt system that cheats the whole world including us.

We got cheated out of Bernie, and we'll be cheated out of anyone anti establishment.

This is what we will get, and we'll pay hanous amounts for our military until we wake up.


Oh screw that.

Bernie had no business running as a Democrat, he's always been an independent.

Whine, whine, whine.

So annoying.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Annee

It's not wining. Under our system he made the Democratic primary. He should have had the same equal rights to make the ticket.

This is how our democracy (democratic republic) works. There were immoral actions to push him out.

While it may have worked towards your narrative, it is a dangerous precidence to the fact this is considered acceptable for our system that was designed to protect the people and integrity of government and process to elect officials.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: Annee

It's not wining. Under our system he made the Democratic primary. He should have had the same equal rights to make the ticket.


Bernie is NOT and has never been a Democrat.

He is and has always been an Independent.

Talk about a user.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:51 PM
link   
One man's opinion.

He is wrong but entitled to his opinion.

Publishing whistleblower's leaked documents does not make him a soothsayer.



posted on Oct, 27 2016 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Assange never said that he would have a "bombshell" before the election. He said that if the "authorities acted" on what was going to be shared, Hillary Clinton would not be elected President.

America is going to prove Julian wrong, in his prediction that Hillary will win because the mainstream media is against Donald Trump. He's not taking into account the "social media effect". Hillary's support in that realm is absolutely DWARFED compared to Trump's.



new topics




 
20
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join