WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign
31 replies, posted
[QUOTE] WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange reportedly "gave excuse after excuse" for refusing to publish a trove of documents related to corruption within the Russian government, according to chat logs obtained by [URL="http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/"]Foreign Policy.
[/URL] The source who sent the chat logs to Foreign Policy told the publication that the documents " would have exposed Russian activities and shown WikiLeaks was not controlled by Russian security services. 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.”
The documents comprised roughly 68 gigabytes worth of data, according to FP, and were the continuation of a set of files about Russia's involvement in Ukraine that had been hacked — and reported on — in 2014. WikiLeaks told FP that it turns down documents it cannot verify or that have already been published elsewhere, and that it "has never rejected a submission due to its country of origin."
The news adds to widespread speculation, however, that the self-described transparency organization was working with the Russian government last year when it released emails that had been hacked from the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.
In one message, WikiLeaks asked the person offering the Russian documents whether there was "an election angle."
'We’re not doing anything until after the election unless its [[I]sic[/I]] fast or election related,” WikiLeaks wrote, according to FP. “We don’t have the resources.”
The US intelligence agencies that assessed the hack concluded in January that it was orchestrated by Russian President Vladimir Putin.
[B]GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher met with Assange this week to see if he could "learn more" about the DNC hacks, his spokesman confirmed on Thursday. Assange "emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails," according to Rohrabacher's spokesman.[/B]
[/QUOTE]
[URL]http://www.businessinsider.com/assange-turned-down-documents-related-to-russian-government-corruption-2017-8[/URL]
[URL]http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/[/URL]
There isn't enough :thinking: to possibly cover this. Regarding bolded; [URL="http://www.businessinsider.com/dana-rohrabacher-visited-wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-in-london-2017-8"]Rohrabacher went to Assange[/URL] looking for confirmation on whether the DNC "hack" was actually a leak, and was apparently given this information, but he will only relay it directly to the President.
[quote]WikiLeaks told FP that it turns down documents it cannot verify[/quote]
HAHAHAHAHhahahahahaha right, like the DNC emails were verifiable when you obtained them either.
the conspiracy runs so deep the people shouting conspiracy are in on the conspiracy
Friendly reminder that when the Panama Paper leaks occurred ([URL="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/may/06/panama-papers-source-breaks-silence-over-scale-of-injustices"]which Wikileaks conveniently ignored[/URL]) Assange went on to claim with absolutely zero evidence that the specific parts pertaining to modes of corruption in Russia's government was created by the US government to [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses-panama-papers-as-an-attempt-to-destabilise-russia"]destabilize Russia[/URL].
[QUOTE=Raidyr;52586113]Friendly reminder that when the Panama Paper leaks occurred ([URL="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/may/06/panama-papers-source-breaks-silence-over-scale-of-injustices"]which Wikileaks conveniently ignored[/URL]) Assange went on to claim with absolutely zero evidence that the specific parts pertaining to modes of corruption in Russia's government was created by the US government to [URL="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/07/putin-dismisses-panama-papers-as-an-attempt-to-destabilise-russia"]destabilize Russia[/URL].[/QUOTE]
You'll say anything with a metaphorical gun to your head.
[Editline]a[/editline]
Maybe not metaphorical.
So Assange is a Russian Partisan... Why? I was under the impression that he was mostly good and that Wikileaks was invaluable. Am I wrong?
[QUOTE=Smoovedawg1;52586188]So Assange is a Russian Partisan... Why? I was under the impression that he was mostly good and that Wikileaks was invaluable. Am I wrong?[/QUOTE]
wikileaks has been compromised by russian money for at least 2 years now
[quote]WikiLeaks told FP that it turns down documents it cannot verify
[/quote]
[QUOTE=Sableye;52586047]HAHAHAHAHhahahahahaha right, like the DNC emails were verifiable when you obtained them either.[/QUOTE]
for a second I thought that someone from this site was interviewing wikileaks
[QUOTE=Judas;52586220]wikileaks has been compromised by russian money for at least 2 years now[/QUOTE]
Assange had a tv show on Russia Today didn't he? for at least a while.
Pretty clear that Assange has a love affair with Putin and Trump
Assange to me comes off as someone so invested in his hate of the West and a belief the West is responsible for much of the current state of the world that he can't see past that.
Man I remember when I posted on on Facepunch claiming Wikileaks was biased and people just said I was salty about Clinton losing.
Everyone has a price
Where can I find that 68 gigabytes worth of data? I would be more then happy to spread those documents.
Yeah, this has been noticeable since around 2013 or so. It's just blatantly obvious nowadays. Assange has destroyed all credibility and goodwill Wikileaks raised with the public. I appreciate what he did in exposing our government's actions, but he's reached a point where it's less about calling out corruption and more about selectively releasing information to influence the public.
Assange probably doesnt want to be hunted by KGB and suddenly commit suicide by bullets in the back of his head.
To be honest, he doesn't even has to be payed by Russia or so, maybe he got some warnings before not to mess with them but thats sorta all conspiracy.
[QUOTE=Mitsuma;52586430]Assange probably doesnt want to be hunted by KGB and suddenly commit suicide by bullets in the back of his head.
To be honest, he doesn't even has to be payed by Russia or so, maybe he got some warnings before not to mess with them but thats sorta all conspiracy.[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call it a conspiracy when an opposition leader gets taken out right beside the Kremlin or gets a taste of Vladi's polonium.
I remember when Wikileaks claimed that they had a big block of files on the Russian Government that they were planning to release in 2010 and then went silent about it, presumably after they received serious threats from the FSB
[QUOTE]The Kremlin had better brace itself for a coming wave of WikiLeaks disclosures about Russia, the website's founder, Julian Assange, told a leading Moscow newspaper Tuesday.
"We have [compromising materials] about Russia, about your government and businessmen," Mr. Assange told the pro-government daily Izvestia. "But not as much as we'd like... We will publish these materials soon."
He then dropped a hint that's likely to be nervously parsed in Russia's corridors of power: "We are helped by the Americans, who pass on a lot of material about Russia," to WikiLeaks, he said. [/QUOTE]
[QUOTE]Assange and another WikiLeaks spokesperson, Kristinn Hrafnsson, who talked to the daily Kommersant Tuesday, refused to provide details. "Russians are going to find out a lot of interesting facts about their country," Mr. Hrafnsson told Kommersant, adding that WikiLeaks would soon be targeting "despotic regimes in China, Russia, and Central Asia" in a series of fresh document dumps. [/QUOTE]
[url]https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2010/1026/WikiLeaks-ready-to-drop-a-bombshell-on-Russia.-But-will-Russians-get-to-read-about-it[/url]
And the response:
[QUOTE]Preliminary analysis shows that there is no threat posed to Russia by Julian Assange’s resource. You have to understand that if there is the desire and the right team, it’s possible to shut it down forever," an expert from the FSB’s Center for Information Security was quoted by Life News as saying on Tuesday.
Links between hacker cells and the FSB made in the past lend credence to this thinly veiled secret services threat. In his recent book on Russia’s secret services, investigative journalist Andrei Soldatov details how the Russian FSB "maintain a sophisticated alliance with unofficial hackers, such as those who carry out cyber attacks on the Web sites of enemies of the state," drawing attention to hacker forums such as Informacia.ru.
[/QUOTE]
[url]http://foreignpolicy.com/2010/11/01/russias-fsb-to-wikileaks-we-could-destroy-you/[/url]
It's interesting to see how things have changed in a relatively short timespan
[quote]GOP Rep. Dana Rohrabacher met with Assange this week to see if he could "learn more" about the DNC hacks, his spokesman confirmed on Thursday. Assange "emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails," according to Rohrabacher's spokesman.[/quote]
Keep in mind that Rohrabacher is suspected by some, [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dana_Rohrabacher#Paid_by_Putin_comment]including the GOP's own leadership[/url], of being a Russian asset
[QUOTE=download;52586321]Assange to me comes off as someone so invested in his hate of the West and a belief the West is responsible for much of the current state of the world that he can't see past that.[/QUOTE]
More like a guy who knows fully well that if he publishes documents showing corruption in the Russian government, that his likelihood of having a fatal fall involving 28 gunshot wounds in the back right outside the Kremlin with miraculously no witnesses or autopsy increases significantly.
[QUOTE=Omali;52586760]More like a guy who knows fully well that if he publishes documents showing corruption in the Russian government, that his likelihood of having a fatal fall involving 28 gunshot wounds in the back right outside the Kremlin with miraculously no witnesses or autopsy increases significantly.[/QUOTE]
This is an understatement. Should be publish such documents, he would not be safe [I]anywhere.[/I] He would be not unlike Osama Bin Laden was to the USA, sans any actual violence / incitement of violence. He would be killed no matter where he was by the Kremlin.
Wikileaks could have gone down at their pinnacle and be touted as the embodiment of a free press, instead they've turned into this convoluted shadow the like of which the Wikileaks of old would have denounced.
Rather sad, really.
[QUOTE=Quark:;52586774]This is an understatement. Should be publish such documents, he would not be safe [I]anywhere.[/I] He would be not unlike Osama Bin Laden was to the USA, sans any actual violence / incitement of violence. He would be killed no matter where he was by the Kremlin.[/QUOTE]
If Russia infiltrated the Ecuadorian embassy to kill Assange, it'd be an international assassination. They'd kill him, but the fallout would be massive. Assange is acting out of self-preservation, which is understandable, and I think he knows his o lit chance at freedom is to cooperate, but at this point his options are to stay in the embassy forever, leave and get imprisoned, or leave and get murdered. He wants to leave the embassy so much that he's basically killed the reputability of his organization. I hope someone eventually leaks the files regardless.
i had a feeling in the pit of my stomach that Assange was too "good" to be trusted.
I hate when people lump this shithead with actual courageous people like Snowden and Manning.
Wikileaks has had a clear, strong bias ever since at the very least their highly edited [I]Collateral Murder[/I] video came out. That was so absurdly anti-american and with all context cut from the short-release version just to demonize. Haven't trusted them one bit since that one.
[QUOTE=Bradyns;52587105]Wikileaks could have gone down at their pinnacle and be touted as the embodiment of a free press, instead they've turned into this convoluted shadow the like of which the Wikileaks of old would have denounced.
Rather sad, really.[/QUOTE]
wikileaks isn't assange but assange is wikileaks. they won't cut him loose even though he's clearly the head of everything wrong with them.
Assange is in a really tough spot. He's been hiding in the Ecuadorian embassy for what, six years now? He's already made an enemy out of the United States. I can see why he'd be loathe to piss off Russia, too.
It pains me to see Wikileaks having such an obvious agenda after all they did in the past to make sure the truth would be out. I just wish some other actor would step forth and assume the role of free press and fact touter.
[QUOTE=VX-79;52592386]I hate when people lump this shithead with actual courageous people like Snowden and Manning.[/QUOTE]
it wasn't that long ago people were calling him a hero, and that Edward Snowden and bradley manning were the shitheads everyone hated for being cowards/traitors/etc
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.