7 ms·

"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

by elpin 5y ago

"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.”". https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download https://www.justice.gov/archives/sco/file/1373816/download

pydry 5y ago
This suggests they wanted Bernie to win. In any case, hitting up sources for leaks is, well, journalism.
- elpin 5y ago
  It shows they wanted to prevent Hillary from building supporters to hurt her campaign and were explicitly strategizing how to achieve that end: "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" They explain their interest in a Bernie angle as a result of Trump, in their minds, having a low probability of winning: "we think trump has only a 25% chance of winning against hillary . . . so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting"
  - pydry 5y ago
    Yes, they were. Fox News hate democrats. CNN hate Republicans. Assange hated Clinton ever since she said "wouldnt it be easier if we just drone striked him?". He still didnt conceal any leaks in pursuit of that goal and he wasnt a russian spy. Nonetheless, both claims are frequently made in the mainstream media linked to Democrats. They are lies.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - bink 5y ago
      He had his own show on Russian state television way back in 2012. He was quite literally being paid by them.
      - pydry 5y ago
        Know of any western TV channels that would offer him a show? lol I kid. Literally 0% chance CNN will give him one. Every establishment critic faces the same choice: 1) appear on PressTV or RT 2) face ridiculously hostile interviewers 3) dont appear on TV Mostly they go for a mix of 1 and 2.
- filoeleven 5y ago
  No, it only suggests that they did not want Bernie supporters to solidify behind Clinton. The strongest suggestion is that they did not want Clinton to win.
  - pydry 5y ago
    Yeah, he did. Disliking Clinton does not make him dishonest, a Russian spy or somebody who acted against the principles of wikileaks, however. It makes him a journalist who doesnt appreciate being threatened with a drone strike by a sitting secretary of state for practising journalism. The fact people give him shit for this is pretty unbelievable. Excusing Russian style journalist assassination is not compatible with respect for Democracy.
  - nullc 5y ago
    At the time Assange was aware that as secretary of defense Hillary Clinton had suggested using a drone strike to assassinate him in the UK. Do you expect him to have been neutral on her candidacy?

by elpin 5y ago

pydry 5y ago

This suggests they wanted Bernie to win. In any case, hitting up sources for leaks is, well, journalism.

elpin 5y ago
It shows they wanted to prevent Hillary from building supporters to hurt her campaign and were explicitly strategizing how to achieve that end: "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" They explain their interest in a Bernie angle as a result of Trump, in their minds, having a low probability of winning: "we think trump has only a 25% chance of winning against hillary . . . so conflict between bernie and hillary is interesting"
- pydry 5y ago
  Yes, they were. Fox News hate democrats. CNN hate Republicans. Assange hated Clinton ever since she said "wouldnt it be easier if we just drone striked him?". He still didnt conceal any leaks in pursuit of that goal and he wasnt a russian spy. Nonetheless, both claims are frequently made in the mainstream media linked to Democrats. They are lies.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - bink 5y ago
    He had his own show on Russian state television way back in 2012. He was quite literally being paid by them.
    - pydry 5y ago
      Know of any western TV channels that would offer him a show? lol I kid. Literally 0% chance CNN will give him one. Every establishment critic faces the same choice: 1) appear on PressTV or RT 2) face ridiculously hostile interviewers 3) dont appear on TV Mostly they go for a mix of 1 and 2.
filoeleven 5y ago
No, it only suggests that they did not want Bernie supporters to solidify behind Clinton. The strongest suggestion is that they did not want Clinton to win.
- pydry 5y ago
  Yeah, he did. Disliking Clinton does not make him dishonest, a Russian spy or somebody who acted against the principles of wikileaks, however. It makes him a journalist who doesnt appreciate being threatened with a drone strike by a sitting secretary of state for practising journalism. The fact people give him shit for this is pretty unbelievable. Excusing Russian style journalist assassination is not compatible with respect for Democracy.
- nullc 5y ago
  At the time Assange was aware that as secretary of defense Hillary Clinton had suggested using a drone strike to assassinate him in the UK. Do you expect him to have been neutral on her candidacy?