He's the reason we got Trump in 2016. He likes to pick and choose which facts to leak and which to keep concealed in order to further his own agenda. Not to mention he gets this information from foreign agents who stole it from our government.
Edward Snowden is far more deserving of recognition for his whistleblowing. He didn't do it to personally profit from it, just because he knew it was the right thing to do.
Mueller Report PDF download
Page 44:
3. Use of WikiLeaks
In order to expand its interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, the GRU units transferred many of the documents they stole from the DNC and the chairman of the Clinton Campaign to WikiLeaks. GRU officers used both the DCLeaks and Guccifer 2.0 personas to communicate with WikiLeaks through Twitter private messaging and through encrypted channels, including possibly through WikiLeaks’s private communication system.
a. WikiLeaks’s Expressed Opposition Toward the Clinton Campaign
WikiLeaks, and particularly its founder Julian Assange, privately expressed opposition to candidate Clinton well before the first release of stolen documents. In November 2015, Assange wrote to other members and associates of WikiLeaks that “[w]e believe it would be much better for GOP to win . . . Dems+Media+liberals woudl [sic] then form a block to reign in their worst qualities. . . . With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities., dems+media+neoliberals will be mute. . . . She’s a bright, well connected, sadisitic sociopath.”156 In March 2016, WikiLeaks released a searchable archive of approximately 30,000 Clinton emails that had been obtained through FOIA litigation.157 While designing the archive, one WikiLeaks member explained the reason for building the archive to another associate:
-[W]e want this repository to become “the place” to search for background on hillary’s plotting at the state department during 2009-2013. . . . Firstly because its useful and will annoy Hillary, but secondly because we want to be seen to be a resource/player in the US election, because eit [sic] may en[]courage people to send us even more important leaks.
b. WikiLeaks’s First Contact with Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks
Shortly after the GRU’s first release of stolen documents through dcleaks.com in June 2016, GRU officers also used the DCLeaks persona to contact WikiLeaks about possible coordination in the future release of stolen emails. On June 14, 2016, @dcleaks_ sent a direct message to @WikiLeaks, noting, “You announced your organization was preparing to publish more Hillary’s emails. We are ready to support you. We have some sensitive information too, in particular, her financial documents. Let’s do it together. What do you think about publishing our info at the same moment? Thank you.”159 Investigative Technique Around the same time, WikiLeaks initiated communications with the GRU persona Guccifer 2.0 shortly after it was used to release documents stolen from the DNC. On June 22, 2016, seven days after Guccifer 2.0’s first releases of stolen DNC documents, WikiLeaks used Twitter’s direct message function to contact the Guccifer 2.0 Twitter account and suggest that Guccifer 2.0 “[s]end any new material [stolen from the DNC] here for us to review and it will have a much higher impact than what you are doing.”160 On July 6, 2016, WikiLeaks again contacted Guccifer 2.0 through Twitter’s private messaging function, writing, “if you have anything hillary related we want it in the next tweo [sic] days prefable [sic] because the DNC is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after.” The Guccifer 2.0 persona responded, “ok . . . i see.” WikiLeaks also explained, “we think trump has only a 25% chance of winning against hillary . . . so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting.”
c. The GRU’s Transfer of Stolen Materials to WikiLeaks
Both the GRU and WikiLeaks sought to hide their communications, which has limited the Office’s ability to collect all of the communications between them. Thus, although it is clear that the stolen DNC and Podesta documents were transferred from the GRU to WikiLeaks, The Office was able to identify when the GRU (operating through its personas Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks) transferred some of the stolen documents to WikiLeaks through online archives set up by the GRU. Assange had access to the internet from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, England. 62 Investigative Technique On July 14, 2016, GRU officers used a Guccifer 2.0 email account to send WikiLeaks an email bearing the subject “big archive” and the message “a new attempt.”163 The email contained an encrypted attachment with the name “wk dnc link1.txt.gpg.”164 Using the Guccifer 2.0 Twitter account, GRU officers sent WikiLeaks an encrypted file and instructions on how to open it.165 On July 18, 2016, WikiLeaks confirmed in a direct message to the Guccifer 2.0 account that it had “the 1Gb or so archive” and would make a release of the stolen documents “this week.”166 On July 22, 2016, WikiLeaks released over 20,000 emails and other documents stolen from the DNC computer networks.167 The Democratic National Convention began three days later. Similar communications occurred between WikiLeaks and the GRU-operated persona DCLeaks. On September 15, 2016, @dcleaks wrote to @WikiLeaks, “hi there! I'm from DC Leaks. How could we discuss some submission-related issues? Am trying to reach out to you via your secured chat but getting no response. I’ve got something that might interest you. You won't be disappointed, I promise.”168 The WikiLeaks account responded, “Hi there,” without further elaboration. The @dcleaks_ account did not respond immediately. The same day, the Twitter account @guccifer_2 sent @dcleaks_ a direct message, which is the first known contact between the personas.169 During subsequent communications, the Guccifer 2.0 persona informed DCLeaks that WikiLeaks was trying to contact DCLeaks and arrange for a way to speak through encrypted emails.170 An analysis of the metadata collected from the WikiLeaks site revealed that the stolen Podesta emails show a creation date of September 19, 2016.171 Based on information about Assange’s computer and its possible operating system, this date may be when the GRU staged the stolen Podesta emails for transfer to WikiLeaks (as the GRU had previously done in July 2016 for the DNC emails).172 The WikiLeaks site also released PDFs and other documents taken from Podesta that were attachments to emails in his account; these documents had a creation date of October 2, 2016, which appears to be the date the attachments were separately staged by WikiLeaks on its site.173 Beginning on September 20, 2016, WikiLeaks and DCLeaks resumed communications in a brief exchange. On September 22, 2016, a DCLeaks email account dcleaksproject@gmail.com sent an email to a WikiLeaks account with the subject “Submission” and the message “Hi from DCLeaks.” The email Investigative Technique contained a PGP-encrypted message with the filename “wiki_mail.txt.gpg.”174 The email, however, bears a number of similarities to the July 14, 2016 email in which GRU officers used the Guccifer 2.0 persona to give WikiLeaks access to the archive of DNC files. On September 22, 2016 (the same day of DCLeaks’ email to WikiLeaks), the Twitter account @dcleaks_ sent a single message to @WikiLeaks with the string of characters Investigative Technique The Office cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016. For example, public reporting identified Andrew Müller-Maguhn as a WikiLeaks associate who may have assisted with the transfer of these stolen documents to WikiLeaks
On October 7, 2016, WikiLeaks released the first emails stolen from the Podesta email account. In total, WikiLeaks released 33 tranches of stolen emails between October 7, 2016 and November 7, 2016. The releases included private speeches given by Clinton;177 internal communications between Podesta and other high-ranking members of the Clinton Campaign;178 and correspondence related to the Clinton Foundation.179 In total, WikiLeaks released over 50,000 documents stolen from Podesta’s personal email account. The last-in-time email released from Podesta’s account was dated March 21, 2016, two days after Podesta received a spearphishing email sent by the GRU.
d. WikiLeaks Statements Dissembling About the Source of Stolen Materials
As reports attributing the DNC and DCCC hacks to the Russian government emerged, WikiLeaks and Assange made several public statements apparently designed to obscure the source of the materials that WikiLeaks was releasing. The file-transfer evidence described above and other information uncovered during the investigation discredit WikiLeaks’s claims about the source of material that it posted. Beginning in the summer of 2016, Assange and WikiLeaks made a number of statements about Seth Rich, a former DNC staff member who was killed in July 2016. The statements about Rich implied falsely that he had been the source of the stolen DNC emails. On August 9, 2016, the @WikiLeaks Twitter account posted: “ANNOUNCE: WikiLeaks has decided to issue a US$20k reward for information leading to conviction for the murder of DNC staffer Seth Rich.”180 Likewise, on August 25, 2016, Assange was asked in an interview, “Why are you so interested in Seth Rich’s killer?” and responded, “We’re very interested in anything that might be a threat to alleged Wikileaks sources.” The interviewer responded to Assange’s statement by commenting, “I know you don’t want to reveal your source, but it certainly sounds like you’re suggesting a man who leaked information to WikiLeaks was then murdered.” Assange replied, “If there’s someone who’s potentially connected to our publication, and that person has been murdered in suspicious circumstances, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the two are connected. But it is a very serious matter…that type of allegation is very serious, as it’s taken very seriously by us.”181 After the U.S. intelligence community publicly announced its assessment that Russia was behind the hacking operation, Assange continued to deny that the Clinton materials released by WikiLeaks had come from Russian
If you go against Russia/China/North Korea/Iran/India, they send a hitman to assassinate you. If you go against US and its allies, they assassinate your character first and you die in an accident in the prison with the camera footage missing.
And this is if you are actually somewhat popular, if not there are a tons of black sites they where they do Russia/China/North Korea/India shit and their populace will deflect how they are more humane like their life depends on it.
The USA created some thoroughly disproven 'rape' charges (it was never a rape charge but that was the media reporting and most people don't read beyond headlines).
Classic painting of him as a traitor. We have 'evidence' you can't see that he works for [insert enemy here]
“We had several leaks sent to Wikileaks, including the Russian hack. It would have exposed Russian activities and shown WikiLeaks was not controlled by Russian security services,” the source who provided the messages wrote to FP. “Many Wikileaks staff and volunteers or their families suffered at the hands of Russian corruption and cruelty, we were sure Wikileaks would release it. Assange gave excuse after excuse.”
You are aware that people can disagree with your conclusions without being a shill, right? Seth Rich’s parents would also like you to stop disrespecting his memory by saying he was murdered by the DNC, they even refute he was the DNC email leaker.
if you made any sense in your "disagreement" other than vitriolic repetition of easily discredited lies, well then i'd consider you might not be a shill.
the DNC leaks were an inside job. This was proven forensically by Bill Binny, an NSA whistleblower...
Seth Rich fit the MO and was murdered shortly thereafter by people that didn't take anything... killed, not robbed...
it could've been not him, but there's a lot more reason to think it was him over russian hackers... or are you really taking the government's word on leaks about the government?
his parents would have no way of knowing any better than me, so i don't see how that's relevant...
Bill Benny, Trump Qult member, enthusiastically refutes reports that exonerates the DNC of murder. Shocking. You accuse me of taking the government’s word when you’re taking the word of someone with an agenda. I mention Seth’s parents because they have a a vested interest in finding out the truth of what happened to their son and their conclusion is the DNC leaker conspiracy theory is a a load of bullshit.
A month after visiting CIA headquarters, Binney came to Britain. After re-examining the data in Guccifer 2.0 files thoroughly with the author of this article, Binney changed his mind. He said there was “no evidence to prove where the download/copy was done”. The Guccifer 2.0 files analysed by Leonard’s g-2.space were “manipulated”, he said, and a “fabrication”.
no they did not! they never had leaks from the RNC and as such, could not release it.
you know they don't do any hacking, right?
people (usually whistleblowers) leak info to wikiLEAKS, and then they verify it and publish it.
they would love to do rnc leaks if they had that information...
From what I've read, it was good at first, then he started cherry picking and only releasing leaks that were convenient for him and aligned with his views.
Who are the ones determining what is "convenient" to Asange and what are their politics? Just because someone will make the accusation does not make it truth.
He's a leaker. He HAS to be selective. He might not even be getting valid info. He might be getting doctored info that would expose his sources if he leaked it, etc, etc. There is every valid reason he has to not publish something that people ignore when they make such accusations.
I don't think people are saying the leaks he released are invalid. What they are saying is that him being selective with what he releases is the problem. If it doesn't align with his political views for example.
I feel like there’s also been an upswing in anti-Taylor Swift stuff in general. It’s been growing since she started her most recent tour and re-recording older albums where she doesn’t own rights to the original recordings, which has lead to her dominating pop music radio stations and being named TIME magazine’s Person of the Year. The issues of ticket scalping from her tour publicly angered her and led to rumbles of a potential congressional investigation of Ticketmaster and Live Nation’s virtual monopoly over concert venues (which is long overdue). But the backlash really seemed to pick up this fall after she started dating a player in the National Football League and attending as many of his games as her schedule allowed. As one of the top-earning celebrities on earth currently, the cameras would often show her reaction after he had a good play, perhaps more often than they would if it was another family member. She would also be shown again a few other times during the games. I don’t know if it’s really happening, but there have been some reports that Taylor Swift fanatics who would not normally watch football have started watching in hopes of seeing her. All of this seems to have made a lot of people mad, but particularly a segment of conservative men for some reason. There was a conspiracy theory going around shortly before her boyfriend’s team played in the league’s championship game that the whole thing was rigged and that after his team won she would give a speech endorsing Joe Biden for president (never mind that the boyfriend’s team had won the championship last year and four years ago and lost the championship three years ago, making them a dominant contender in recent years). It’s been strange to me how many people I’ve seen who are very vocal about climate change being a hoax are suddenly posting about how much Taylor Swift uses her private jet and how bad the emissions from it are, making them strange bedfellows with climate change believers who also oppose private jet use in general. I’ve also started seeing memes from conservative people about how much they hate her music and would never want to listen to her performance, even though I’m pretty sure some of these people were fans of hers back from her debut as a country music singer-songwriter up until fairly recently, even after she transitioned to mainstream pop. I find the whole thing very strange, like out of 1984 when the war opponent would suddenly flip and everyone insisted they’d always hated the new opponent and loved the new ally, their old opponent.
Taylor uses her private jet way too much. But recently she threatened the Twitter account tracking the plane's movement. So that's probably why the memes are coming out now.
You will only get anti-hexbear answers because iirc theyve been defederated. Hexbear is a communist instance that has its roots from /r/ChapoTrapHouse. They're disliked by some beause they're aggressive and often intentionally inflammatory.
What they're NOT is alt right trolls in disguise as some idiots claim. Some people just can't comprehend that there's any position to the left of neoliberalism.
They don't 'defend Russia'. They recognize that the US is in many ways just as bad for the other countries they stick their noses in (look up the many coups they've funded in other countries) and that its better to have a counterbalance in geopolitics. That just so happens to be Russia (and China), but if you actually read the posts there (which I doubt most people have), nobody is actually a fan of Putin or his policies.
Edit: Russia is a capitalist nation that oppresses LGBTQ+ folks and has reactionary anti-communist policies. Just as I guessed, downvoters haven't actually read any Hexbear posts or they'd realize why thinking a communist instance supports Russia in a general sense is complete nonsense.
I'm sorry, but this is asking for a mental gymnastics meme.
Mental gymnastics: They don't defend Russia. They just recognize that the US is bad. It's better to have a counterbalance in geopolitics. They're still lefties. It just happens that Russia fills that niche. They don't actually like Putin.
Mental non-gymnastics: They claim to be lefties. They seem to defend Russia. They're strawmen.
But no, I agree with you that (at least a good deal of) Hexbear is actually left wing. Except there are probably some right wing poser trolls among them, and it's hard to say how many. There are probbably right wing poser trolls among us too. Hehe among us.
I agree with you. What I meant to convey is that users may support Russia in specific situations that run counter to the goals of the United States and other Western nations, but as a whole, Russia is not an ally of leftists or something that users represent as an ideal. Neither is the United States. Political nuance tends to not do well in instances like .world though. They prefer to brush off anything as "Russian trolls" rather than practice introspection as to why someone would want to resist their goals in the first place.
So you'll see some things about how it fits in a car cup holder (Lots of others do too) or how one survived a fire (This is just how insulated bottles like that tend to work) and those are all... good enough... but they're not why there's so much hype. The Hype has been carefully engineered. The head of the company is a Marketing guy, and he basically imported Sneaker culture into a new industry. Stanley Cups are released on a limited basis, with partnerships producing only limited supplies. It's induced scarcity and marketing, people are rushing to get one because if they don't rush, there won't be any more, and that makes more people want to rush to get one.
It's just an insulated cup that is intentionally hard to find sometimes. That's all.
This is the third post I've seen about Stanley cups and only now did I realize it had nothing to do with hockey. I was very confused how someone had spent $3000 on Stanley cups
Out of the loop
Hot