> He also made the decision not to publish data from similar attacks on the RNC.
I've been watching Assange's odissey quite closely and I don't remember seeing anything about withholding data "on the RNC". Do you have an example?
I've been watching Assange's odissey quite closely and I don't remember seeing anything about withholding data "on the RNC". Do you have an example?
Both things happened around the same time, both sourced to Russian hackers. It is unknown if Assange was offered the RNC emails for release. It is pretty clear this was done for political ends to aid Donald Trump, less clear if Assange was personally "in" on it.
So this is a typical bullshit thing for democrat-party aligned people for whom the ends justifies the means and there's no bad tactics, only bad targets. The very same types that tell you "twitter files are partisan nothing burgers" and that people like Matt Taibbi are "right wingers".
I don't care what the FBI tries to pull to muddy the waters. Or the government toppling CIA, for that matter.
Assange has been pursued and illegally imprisoned for exposing corruption and doing journalism, nothing more.
"twitter files are partisan nothing burgers"
Glenn greenwald and taibbi are not republican sycophants but true left but, just like criticizing Hillary made you "russian" or trumpist, seeing the truth about censorship makes you "right winger/republican".
Edit: hypocrisy at its finest: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36927153
It's so hilarious. You can't even come up with an original dismissal. It's the same old tired labels. Try harder.
https://thehill.com/opinion/civil-rights/4125603-facebook-fi...
fun how the nothingburger even applies to jokes.
Begone, troll.
" Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."
"Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."
Secondly, there is no debate here. I am merely witnessing the equivalent of a person screaming uncontrollably for no reason at an intersection in a big city.
If the theory that the hacks and the leaks of the DNC documents come from Russia to sabotage Clinton's chances holds water, it would make more sense that the Russian sources release to WikiLeaks only the dirt on the DNC, doesn't it?