Breaking: Assange Emerges to Confirm Russia Was NOT the Source of DNC/Podesta Leak

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: goou111

originally posted by: Kettu
Just because Guccifer 2.0 didn't give Wikileaks the emails he takes credit for hacking, doesn't mean Russia's hands are clean.

It's like using a proxy server on the internet to hide your IP address. You use a middleman to hand over the emails.

Russia ------> Guccifer 2.0 ------> shady 3rd party CIA knows works with Russian government ------> Wikileaks

You now have separation between Russia and Wikileaks.

So what if the Russian government with a Russian government email address didn't give Wikileaks the emails? They were orchestrated by Russia.

I have not seen one shred of proof that Russia is behind the hacks. Just because you want something to be true really really bad deos not make it true.

well, why would you believe it?....after all, it's agreed upon by all the American intelligence agencies, and of course, since you are a trump voter, you believe nothing but what comes out of trumps mouth...your butt buddy Putin never lies

Really?

Which agencies and more importantly which employees of those agencies is willing to come forth and say this publicly?

Yeah, I thought so...

look it up...geez...is that so hard for you people. and why would I answer you, you are so far out in bubbleland, that you don't even trust our own government...move to friggin Moscow for all i care, you unpatriotic piece of crap

I did look it up, and no -- I couldn't find anything credible at all. Not trusting the government does not make you live in bubble land, I mean -- did you even see the video I posted above? The government actively admitting that they use fake news to control the public opinion. That video is from the 70's, and what they are doing there, is fighting for the legalization of propoganda on American Citizens. Something they finally got pushed into law in 2013 via the NDAA [National Defense Authorization Act] which grants the government the power to use propaganda [fake news] on it's own populace.

This is not fiction. This is real. How can you trust someone that lies to you actively and openly? They were using propaganda on US citizens illegally for over 35 years and just got it signed into law, so it's no longer illegal.

The very same people who are claiming Russia influenced the election -- which, if you use your head, even if the Russians were behind the hack, they still didn't influence the election, the facts in the leaks did. The facts are true -- that's not being disputed -- they want to throw away the evidence because of the source, not because it's not credible. My question to you; if the hack was American in source -- would that change anything for you?

Blindly trusting anybody makes you live in bubbleland. Doubt is an indicator of intelligence. The leaks proved that Clinton is a criminal, and the DNC engaged in criminal activity to force out candidates that weren't Clinton. That's not being disputed. Because she's a criminal, and the DNC engaged in illegal practices to try to select a president, the American populace voted against her. Russia or no Russia -- makes no difference, they still did all of that stuff.

If it turns out to be Russian in source [which it's not, since the Podesta dump came from his physical phone] you should thank Putin for showing us that our potential next president was a war criminal who actively funds ISIS. That's real. It's also not true that Putin had anything to do with it, since we know where the Podesta breach came from, which was American in source.

The only way the hacks could have "influenced" the election is if they contain fictional material. They did not.

I DO NOT LIKE TRUMP. I DID NOT VOTE FOR TRUMP. I WILL DEFEND HIM THOUGH, BECAUSE HE WAS ELECTED LEGITIMATELY. And that's the definition of Patriotic.

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: goou111

originally posted by: Kettu
Just because Guccifer 2.0 didn't give Wikileaks the emails he takes credit for hacking, doesn't mean Russia's hands are clean.

It's like using a proxy server on the internet to hide your IP address. You use a middleman to hand over the emails.

Russia ------> Guccifer 2.0 ------> shady 3rd party CIA knows works with Russian government ------> Wikileaks

You now have separation between Russia and Wikileaks.

So what if the Russian government with a Russian government email address didn't give Wikileaks the emails? They were orchestrated by Russia.

I have not seen one shred of proof that Russia is behind the hacks. Just because you want something to be true really really bad deos not make it true.

well, why would you believe it?....after all, it's agreed upon by all the American intelligence agencies, and of course, since you are a trump voter, you believe nothing but what comes out of trumps mouth...your butt buddy Putin never lies

Really?

Which agencies and more importantly which employees of those agencies is willing to come forth and say this publicly?

Yeah, I thought so...

look it up...geez...is that so hard for you people. and why would I answer you, you are so far out in bubbleland, that you don't even trust our own government...move to friggin Moscow for all i care, you unpatriotic piece of crap

LOL!!

Look what up?

Give me one name from even one agency that is willing to say this publicly.

Just one.

I'll wait.

You can't, can you?

And do you know why? Because there aren't any. None. Zero.

If & when someone actually does come out and publicly own this position, I'll consider it then.

And I am *far* more patriotic than you or your ilk. But I refuse to blindly believe crap just because it's shoveled by the MSM who have proven time and time again to be untrustworthy.

You might want to evaluate your own patriotism if you can be so easily swayed by something just because it happens to agree with your own position. That is neither patriotic nor does it demonstrate any critical thinking abilities.

Are you a mindless drone?

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Riffrafter

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: goou111

originally posted by: Kettu
Just because Guccifer 2.0 didn't give Wikileaks the emails he takes credit for hacking, doesn't mean Russia's hands are clean.

It's like using a proxy server on the internet to hide your IP address. You use a middleman to hand over the emails.

Russia ------> Guccifer 2.0 ------> shady 3rd party CIA knows works with Russian government ------> Wikileaks

You now have separation between Russia and Wikileaks.

So what if the Russian government with a Russian government email address didn't give Wikileaks the emails? They were orchestrated by Russia.

I have not seen one shred of proof that Russia is behind the hacks. Just because you want something to be true really really bad deos not make it true.

well, why would you believe it?....after all, it's agreed upon by all the American intelligence agencies, and of course, since you are a trump voter, you believe nothing but what comes out of trumps mouth...your butt buddy Putin never lies

Really?

Which agencies and more importantly which employees of those agencies is willing to come forth and say this publicly?

Yeah, I thought so...

look it up...geez...is that so hard for you people. and why would I answer you, you are so far out in bubbleland, that you don't even trust our own government...move to friggin Moscow for all i care, you unpatriotic piece of crap

LOL!!

Look what up?

Give me one name from even one agency that is willing to say this publicly.

Just one.

I'll wait.

You can't can you? And do you know why? Because there aren't any. None. Zero.

If & when someone actually does come out and publicly own this position, I'll consider it then.

And I am *far* more patriotic than you or your ilk. But I refuse to blindly believe crap just because it's shoveled by the MSM who have proven time and time again to be untrustworthy.

You might want to evaluate your own patriotism if you can be easily swayed by something just because it happens to agree with your own thinking. That is neither patriotic nor does it demonstrate any critical thinking abilities.

Are you a mindless drone?

Well, they want you to believe that James Comey believes it was the Russians -- but Comey's integrity is questionable at best. He was sitting on incriminating evidence that would put Hillary in prison and was forced into blocking the indictment under threats from the Obama administration. Not only that, but James Comey hasn't come out and said that himself -- it was said for him by unnamed "Government officials."

FBI Director James B. Comey and Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. are in agreement with a CIA assessment that Russia intervened in the 2016 election in part to help Donald Trump win the presidency, according to U.S. officials.

So yeah I mean, there are names attached, but not by the names that were attached, furthermore, there is nothing to insinuate how they came to that conclusion. No proof, not even conjecture. Who are the US officials who say James B. Comey and James R. Clapper Jr are in agreement? Why didn't Washington Post ask James B. Comey and James R. Clapper Jr. if they are in agreement to verify the source?

Specifically, CIA briefers told the senators it was now “quite clear” that electing Trump was one of Russia’s goals, according to the officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss intelligence matters.

Which CIA briefer, told which senators? If it's quite clear, why isn't there evidence? Oh the government officials said this anonymously? Oh but they dropped Comey's name though to make it seem credible? Seriously bananas that anyone could believe this rubbish.

Thanks WaPo.

Washington Post had been caught pushing propaganda [fake news] specifically supporting the Russian Hack whilst blaming the Kremlin, by sourcing "ProporNot." Which is apparently a brand new thing started in 2016, which is supposed to filter out propaganda, but instead actually pushes it.

Source
Washington Post fake news story blurs the definition of fake news


So basically that entire Washington Post article claims that James B. Comey and James R. Clapper Jr agree, but they didn't get this information from either of them or even reach out to Comey or Clapper Jr. to verify the integrity of their "Anonymous Source" and confirm it was indeed even factual.

Which is really no source at all, because it's a completely made up article. If the Washington Post was credible, they would have put out requests for comment to both Comey and Clapper Jr. -- they did not, because if they did, Comey and Clapper Jr. would bust up their story.

You don't even need someone to tell you it's fake news, because they don't even try to verify the story they are trying to sell you.

Anonymous Source Rules
Rule Number 1
An Anonymous Source is NO SOURCE AT ALL if the information revealed by the source cannot be verified.
Rule Number 2
Any information containing parties, businesses/corporations, entities mentioned by the source should be used to contact for comment about the information revealed by the source in a proper followup to verify and confirm the information, so you can be sure of the accuracy of your article to maintain the maximum amount of truth and unbiased reporting as possible.

In this case, there was a way to verify the source, because the source spoke FOR two different people that ARE NOT the source. In order to verify this story -- all it would take is a 30 second documented phone call to James B. Comey and then a second one to James R. Clapper Jr.

It's propaganda, or they would have picked up the phone. What's happening here is that; the Electors are just regular people like you and me, and they get most of their information from the news, they don't vote until December and their votes aren't counted until January 8th.... so what the government is doing, is running a propaganda campaign ON the EC Electors to try to get them to flip their vote. That is by definition tampering with the election. It's the US Government that is tampering under the guise of "The Bad Russian Man."

The DNC and the Obama Administration are running propaganda on the United States Public right now to try to select a president and undermine the legitimate election. None of the claims can be objectified, nothing verified, and nobody will speak publicly or show any proof. None of the articles perpetuating this fraud are properly sourced. This is damage control for the leaks. Itself ironically was actually leaked in advance of the election.

Wikileaks published cables that more or less specifically stated that if Trump won, that the CIA's strategy would be to blame the Russians for interfering via hack in an attempt to invalidate the president elect. It was front page news here on ATS the last weak of October.

This is the biggest conspiracy in the history of The United States of America, and it's being perpetrated against the people by the United States Government.

a reply to: Riffrafter



So are we to understand that Julian Assange hasn't even got a smart phone to phone his Mum, who is doing everything she can to get him free? www.dailymail.co.uk...

Then what about Christine Assange's Facebook page. It hasn't been touched since 2011.Any Aussies got a bit of the real oil?

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: Riffrafter



So are we to understand that Julian Assange hasn't even got a smart phone to phone his Mum, who is doing everything she can to get him free? www.dailymail.co.uk...

If he's smart and likes living he doesnt...

Not going to comment on this topic anymore, save for this last time.

Anyone who believes Russia has interfered with our election is a fool of FLAT-EARTH proportions.

There, that's the last time I comment on this topic and give it any more credence.