Dissecting The WikiLeaks Russian Connection - Part One

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

There seems to be too much Russian interference with "liberal" politics.

originally posted by: Kali74
There seems to be too much Russian interference with "liberal" politics.

I think that is a byproduct of his targeting Clinton. I do no think he is anti-liberal per se, from what I have heard when he speaks he comes across as more of a liberal-socialist than anything else.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's what I always thought too but it seems to be only liberals being targeted by Russian hacks.

originally posted by: Kali74
That's what I always thought too but it seems to be only liberals being targeted by Russian hacks.

I would not be surprised if they have documents on the Republican Party as well and are sitting on them. Assange makes it very clear he thinks Clinton is a vile politician whose views run contrary to his.

I could easily see them, if Trump wins, making him look even more buffoonish by releasing information on him once he becomes President. Assange does not like the United States and his agenda is to embarrass us at every turn.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I know Assange hates her which is odd since in some of her emails was something about her gong to bat for him. I'm just thinking he's playing with fire by dealing with the Russians. Has he lost his mind or is it something else?

originally posted by: Kali74
I'm just thinking he's playing with fire by dealing with the Russians. Has he lost his mind or is it something else?

I think his agenda and the Russian agenda mesh which is to weaken the United States.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Or the entire West?

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: justneo

If Russia is leaking the information, then it would signify that their interests are more probable to be in line with a particular candidates views. What it doesn't equate to - is that the opposing candidate is in bed with Russia or has Russian interests in mind.

This is where the thread falls flat. While Trump has some connections to Russia, Hillary has more.

The number one issue for Russia, imo, to attempt to manipulate US elections is to gain more control in the Middle East, particularly the path of the proposed natural gas lines from Qatar and Iran. Both run through Syria.

If Russia isn't able to control the flow of natural gas to Europe from these countries, it will deal a major blow to their economy.

If thwy are behind the attacks, my guess is that they figure Trump is a better choice to accomplish this than Clinton. There are many reasons as to why they might believe this - but most will probably lead back to how the Clinton's benefited from their 'foundation'.

I personally don't believe wikileaks is a Russian front. But, I can see why Assange would align himself with Russia as they both have a common enemy - Hillary. In the end though, I'd like to believe that Assange is much to prideful to not publish any legitimate leak he obtains.

I suppose time will tell

I see it more about which candidate is easier to influence/control. Hillary has been in government for a long time so she's probably all bought up at this point whereas Trump counts on surrounding himself with people who know the job. All you have to do to influence and control Trump is influence and control his advisors. Scary stuff.

originally posted by: Kali74
Or the entire West?

Yes, but us first.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Oh goodie :/

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Yes, but us first.

That explains that whole "America First" slogan.

a reply to: Chadwickus

I think the world,not just Russia, ACTUALLY prefers a more STABLE America,instead of ...WHATEVER has been going on the last 8 years.
WE have never behaved like this before.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

I think his agenda and the Russian agenda mesh which is to weaken the United States.

I agree with that to an extent though I believe it's grown beyond a personal vendetta against the US govt or Clinton. If you look at WikiLeaks targets, they don't simply focus on the US and ignore Russia — they also ignore Russian allies while targetting those of the US.

Maybe that's what I'll do in the next post? A breakdown of the leaks, Tweets, etc for the past 5-6 years as way of quantifying WikiLeak's bias.

In any case, I believe that citizens of the US and allied nations need to strongly consider Assange's agenda (which is clearly not neutral and not the stated mission of WikiLeaks) as they're swooning over him and holding him up as some sort of luminary of transparency and free speech.

a reply to: ghostrager

I think we both know that the uranium deal and the donations to the Clinton Foundation will just eat up thread space. We can argue back and forth on it, but it'll be 'inconclusive' in the end.

Fair enough. It's certainly a discussion for another thread. FTR, I've done a bit of research into Uranium One - Rosatom and my conclusion is that it's far more interesting in terms of Bill Clinton's cronyism than a concern over Russian influence. I would be interested in knowing more about the relationships of the Clintons and other Western leaders/oligarchs to Victor Pinchuk who seems to be something of a nexus.

Absolutely agree. And that is the crux of the leaks. Is Russia backing the leaks, how does it benefit them, and what does Trump have to gain (and how)? Those are the questions that need to be examined.

I'm trying.

IMO, there's not enough evidence to suggest that Trump is intentionally pursuing the White House to profit from Russia. If Russia is toying with the elections - they are hedging their bets.

I would agree that there hasn't been enough evidence to make a serious allegation about Trump pursuing the presidency in order to profit from Russia though there's not exactly a shortage of tantalizing circumstantial evidence to follow up on.

However, it's concerning enough to me that he certainly seems to be something a foreign policy anti-wonk who is easily steered by advisors and his advisors so far have been disconcertingly pro-Putin.

originally posted by: Chadwickus
a reply to: justneo

If this is true, it is proof of the Russian government interfering with US politics.

Your idea that good old Russia is looking out for the American people is delusional.

Exposing corruption in the U.S. government is bad for the American people ?

Goes to show what kind of people are voting for Hillary.

originally posted by: Kali74
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

That's what I always thought too but it seems to be only liberals being targeted by Russian hacks.

Liberals are the ones who need targeting lately, they are the ones causing all the problems and confusion in the world.

And everyone knows it.

a reply to: desert

Thank you and thanks for the link, I'm reading it right now.

Russia does not want us to be "stable". Have we lost the propaganda war? Have we become what the Russian intelligence has wanted? Did they do it to us, or did we do it to ourselves?

From 2014 Russia and the Menace of Unreality....How Vladimir Putin is revolutionizing information warfare

[T]here is one great difference between Soviet propaganda and the latest Russian variety. For the Soviets, the idea of truth was important—even when they were lying. Soviet propaganda went to great lengths to ‘prove’ that the Kremlin’s theories or bits of disinformation were fact. When the U.S. government accused the Soviets of spreading disinformation—such as the story that the CIA invented AIDS as a weapon—it would cause howls of outrage from top Russian figures, including General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev.
....
In today’s Russia, by contrast, the idea of truth is irrelevant. ....The notion of ‘journalism,’ in the sense of reporting ‘facts’ or ‘truth,’ has been wiped out.
.....
The point of this new propaganda is not to persuade anyone, but to keep the viewer hooked and distracted—to disrupt Western narratives rather than provide a counternarrative. It is the perfect genre for conspiracy theories, which are all over Russian TV. ....they were trying not so much to convince viewers of any one version of events, but rather to leave them confused, paranoid, and passive—living in a Kremlin-controlled virtual reality that can no longer be mediated or debated by any appeal to ‘truth.’
.....
The United States, meanwhile, is struggling with its messaging to the outside world. America is in an “information war and we are losing that war,” Hillary Clinton told Congress in 2011, citing the success of Russian and Chinese media.
.....
Just as the Kremlin’s international propaganda campaign intensifies, the West is having its own crisis of faith in the idea of ‘truth.’ It’s been a long time coming. Back in 1962, Daniel Boorstin, who would later serve as librarian of the U.S. Congress, wrote in The Image about how advances in advertising and television meant, “The question, ‘Is it real?’ is less important than, ‘Is it newsworthy?’ ... We are threatened by a new and a peculiarly American menace … the menace of unreality.” By the 2000s, this idea had moved from the realm of commerce to the realm of high politics, captured in the now-legendary quote from an unnamed George W. Bush aide in The New York Times: “We’re an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality—judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors … and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.”
.....
The pressure on reality from capitalism and Capitol Hill coincides with an anti-establishment drive in the U.S. that likewise claims that all truth is relative. ....In some dark, ideological wood, Putin the authoritarian gay-basher and Greenwald the gay, leftist-libertarian meet and agree. And as the consensus for reality-based politics fractures, that space becomes ripe for exploitation. It’s precisely this trend that the Kremlin hopes to exploit.
.....
[I]nsisting on the lie, the Kremlin intimidates others by showing that it is in control of defining ‘reality.’ This is why it’s so important for Moscow to do away with truth. If nothing is true, then anything is possible. We are left with the sense that we don’t know what Putin will do next—that he’s unpredictable and thus dangerous. We’re rendered stunned, spun, and flummoxed by the Kremlin’s weaponization of absurdity and unreality.

a reply to: ParasuvO

Exposing corruption in the U.S. government is bad for the American people ? Goes to show what kind of people are voting for Hillary.

Exposing the corruption within a single faction of a corrupt whole to advance the interests of a foreign power that has an adversarial relationship with the US and its allies and is desperately trying to crawl its way back to superpower status.

What about that is good for the American people exactly?

a reply to: Chadwickus

Thank you and yes, we do seem to be lousy with Russian apologists. There's the actual pro-Putin crowd and then there are a lot of "first order thinkers" who avoid nuance and conceive of things purely in terms of binary propositions which makes them highly susceptible to falling (repeatedly) for false dichotomies.