Hacker News Reader

Comment by colde | Hacker News Reader

I am not sure that is really a trustworthy source at this point. Particularly since it seems to focus a lot on involving Hillary.

View on HN

Agreed. Wikileaks may have been reputable at some point in the past but they're not trustworthy now. It's not so much the 'focus on Hillary' but their focus on being pro-Russian state. [1]

The founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, has his own show on RT [2], which mean's he's essentially being paid by Russia's state propaganda media [3]. That, along with attacking the Panama papers leak for "going after Putin", and a string of other pro-Russia activity, means Wikileaks is not to be trusted.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WikiLeaks#Allegations_of_Russi...

[2] https://www.rt.com/tags/the-julian-assange-show/

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RT_(TV_network)#Propaganda_cla...

Everyone ignore the fact that leaked documents layer out a plan by US Intel agencies to discredit Assange and WL via tactics just like this, these are now the leaks we're looking for apparently.

RT has some of the best coverage of some things around, and this constant talking as of it is putins right hand in media form is grounded in tribalism and not in careful evaluation of the facts.

Which parts of the wikipedia citation are "grounded in tribalism"?

That is a poor reason for casting doubt...that the facts are inconvenient to your politics.

That's a ridiculous assertion against a news org that has a better track record than just about any other news org in existence, and it's sad to see people falling for this line of thinking.

basically every claim is sourced as far as I can tell. Schmidt is pretty entrenched with Clinton considering he started a company dedicated to using tech to get her elected, Groundworks

https://qz.com/520652/groundwork-eric-schmidt-startup-workin...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com