Leaked WikiLeaks Messages Reveal Anti-Clinton Agenda and More

These are leaks of messages from Twitter DMs to lower level associates of WikiLeaks and were published today by The Intercept. What they reveal about Assange may come as a surprise to some who have continued to believe that he's a luminary of integrity and a "journalist" of some sort who simply publishes what he's given for the benefit of all.

The reality is that as the hypocrite Assange smugly points fingers at the media, politicians, governments and their agencies, behind the scenes he's using his unilateral control over the flow information to interfere in geopolitics and the domestic affairs of sovereign nations as he sees fit.

In Leaked Chats, WikiLeaks Discusses Preference for GOP Over Clinton, Russia, Trolling, and Feminists They Don’t Like

The chats are from a direct message group between WikiLeaks and about 10 of its online boosters, described as a “low security channel for some very long term and reliable supporters who are on twitter.” Perhaps because of the “low security” designation, the chats do not shed much light on the most sensitive questions surrounding WikiLeaks and the 2016 election. They don’t reveal anything new about WikiLeaks’ relationship with the Trump campaign, although they are consistent with the group’s public statements casting doubt on claims by former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone that he had advanced knowledge of the group’s anti-Clinton leaks. The chats don’t illuminate any connections with the Russian government or tell us anything about the identity of the source who provided WikiLeaks with emails from the Democratic National Committee and Clinton campaign chair John Podesta.

The archive spans from May 2015 through November 2017 and includes over 11,000 messages, more than 10 percent of them written from the WikiLeaks account. With this article, The Intercept is publishing newsworthy excerpts from the leaked messages.

A former supporter of and volunteer for WikiLeaks, who goes by the name “Hazelpress” (The Intercept does not know the person’s real name), set up the direct message group in mid-2015 and later decided to leak its contents to the media after news broke that WikiLeaks had secretly corresponded with Donald Trump Jr. during the election, urging candidate Trump to reject the results as rigged if he lost and requesting that the president-elect use his connections to get Assange an Australian ambassadorship. “At this point, considering the power exercised by WikiLeaks, [disclosing] literally anything Assange says is in the public interest,” Hazelpress told The Intercept, including Assange’s political position during the 2016 selection, since “WikiLeaks purports to be a neutral transparency organization.”

In some of the published messages, Assange can be seen laying out a rationale for his preference for a GOP candidate over Hillary to these lower level "boosters."




In other messages, Assange paints Russia as a victim of the US with "minor imperialistic goals in its near abroad."



In the leaked conversations, Assange can also be seen instructing minions to adopt fake identities and troll his critics — even remarking that they could use the responses triggered by their trolling to engineer evidence of a hostile atmosphere which could then be presented in court.




These are a few excerpts from the story which contains not only embeds of other messages, including an exchange that appears to throw some water on Roger Stone's claims of being an insider (at least the earliest ones, after all just two week's ago he was paying Assange a personal visit), but links to several more on DocumentCloud. (I haven't gone over them all yet)

Keep in mind when reading these leaked messages, that they represents only some of what Assange was saying to low level "boosters" through insecure channels (Twitter DM).

She was able to cheat her way to the DNC victory and tried her best to cheat her way into a presidential victory but thank God the people were smart enough to vote for Trump in the states that mattered most.

" Shes a bright, well connected sadistic sociopath".

I liked that one.

a reply to: Thirty6BelowZero


Yes, US voters are known for their intelligence and clear minds, LOL They never get fooled...

a reply to: theantediluvian

Shillary Clongdin did jokingly say she wanted to drone Assange after all.

Also the Clingdings have been particularly dirty politicians and being that wiki-LEAKS tends to piss them off often for using the plentiful material generated, they are OBVIOUSLY going to be at odds.

Not too long ago Assange was the darling of the "left". A snowden. A hero.

Now not so much?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Yeah wow and now? We have chatlogs of Shareblue and other left leaning sites who discussed subverting GOP and Trump with large campaigns. I have never seen you posting about them. Bipartisan my ass.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Wikileaks holds views dissimilar to CNN, MSNBC, HuffPo, WaPo, and other American MSM outlets
This is allegedly the March edition of "Duh Illustrated's" cover headline. It will also be cross-reported in the 2nd Quarter 2018 edition of "And This is News to Whom?"

a reply to: theantediluvian

That’s rich considering Clinton had an anti-Bernie Sanders agenda.

So where is Assange's posts? Or are we to assume the screenshots are him? How do you know?

Jumping the shark a bit....

a reply to: theantediluvian

The reality is that as the hypocrite Assange smugly points fingers at the media, politicians, governments and their agencies, behind the scenes he's using his unilateral control over the flow information to interfere in geopolitics and the domestic affairs of sovereign nations as he sees fit.

You got that backwards. He expose(d) the meddlesome gubments and their agencies lies.

Thats why they want him so bad , can't set foot outside that embassy.

originally posted by: UnBreakable
a reply to: theantediluvian

That’s rich considering Clinton had an anti-Bernie Sanders agenda.

Yeah i'm hoping the Bernie voters don't forget that and make the right choice this year.

a reply to: tadaman

Shillary Clongdin did jokingly say she wanted to drone Assange after all

Did she? That's an allegation coming from an "anonymous source" cited by True Pundit which created a number of hoaxes during the election.

Also the Clingdings have been particularly dirty politicians and being that wiki-LEAKS tends to piss them off often for using the plentiful material generated, they are OBVIOUSLY going to be at odds.

Assange presents himself as a dispassionate non-partisan whose only interest is transparency. Regardless of what you believe of Clinton or where you believe WL sourced the pre-election releases, this only confirms what has been obvious for a while — that Assange has a vested interest, an agenda that dictates what gets published and a willingness to influence politics however he deems appropriate.

The facade of journalistic integrity is a lie. The reality is he controls the flow of information to achieve a political result that he wants. Under his control, WikiLeaks is essentially a hostile foreign actor, meddling in politics as much as any of the state intelligence agencies he'd presume to expose. Worse yet, he's self-appointed and answers to nobody.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Wiki has NEVER had to retract anything they publish. How many can say that in this vast ocean of journalistic integrity?

a reply to: theantediluvian

For the record, Wikileaks has always focused on malfeasance and cover ups at the highest state levels. As a result, the majority of their revelations will, obviously, be directed at whoever has most recently been in a position of authority and clearance. In that election, Clinton ran as the experienced, established, extension of the outgoing president. Any Wikileak documents collected on the White House during the prior 8 years were going to be viewed as a negative against her.

I am reminded of this little gem...
www.realclearpolitics.com...

CHRIS CUOMO, CNN: Remember, it is illegal to possess these stolen documents. It is different from the media. So everything you learn about this, you are learning from us.

Wikileaks is no friend of The Narrative. Doesn't make them bad guys, contrary to the American propaganda machines in the MSM... it just means they bring the pain to those who deserve to feel every screaming, searing, hot inch of it.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: theantediluvian

Wiki has NEVER had to retract anything they publish. How many can say that in this vast ocean of journalistic integrity?

Why would they have to retract anything? They're dumping documents. It's about controlling what gets released, when and how to achieve a desired result.

a reply to: Rosinitiate

The Intercept is a very reliable source, one of the best.

They're a true whistle-blower outlet, Jeremy Scahill and Glenn Greenwald started it after they broke the Snowden story along with Reality Winner.

Where's the bombshell?

Did I miss something?

a reply to: theantediluvian

Any reasonable human being should have an anti-Clinton bias. It's called self preservation.

Furthermore, Was anything they leaked incorrect?

My main concern is people are failing to realize all aspects of our democracy are flawed and have been taken advantage of.

This was on of the most scandal filled elections for both side, be it accusations but most definitely alarming facts.

Until people step aside from politics and quit defending people who don't play by the rules, it will only get worse.

a reply to: RickinVa

It's not so much about a bombshell as just facts we should know.

Assange staunchly refuted claims he directly helped the GOP. And as a "fighter of transparency" its a bit ironic.