Blissfully ignorant is what you are. You and Fuji can knock yourselves out on how much of an asshole Trump is, and I will continue to speak out against corruption.
Wikileaks: The polls are rigged
- Thread starter AK-47
- Start date
What kind of fun would the internet be without conspiracy theories though??
It would be a lot more boring
All WikiLeaks is doing is balancing the scales. Almost the entirety of the MSM is working full time to discredit Trump, if you haven't noticed. And you're worried that one organization is out there trying to discredit Clinton?
Besides, it's not WikiLeaks bailiwick to deal with private sector corruption issues. That's why they are focussing on Clinton. She's the one that's been in government for 30 years.
I'll worry about that if and when Trump ever conducts government business via those servers.
Assange was asked by many people why only information on Hillary, and the government? His reply "if you give me information on Trump, than I would publish it, but nobody has"
Reminder: Its important to remember WikiLeaks is a publisher. Anonymous sources submit documents on their platform. They verify and publish.
Reminder: Its important to remember WikiLeaks is a publisher. Anonymous sources submit documents on their platform. They verify and publish.
There you go with your double standards again; only government business needs to be honest and open. OOps! Wait! the Clinton issue is the emails were top secret confidential — like Don's tax business.
So how is it we're supposed to have the right to see hers again? But not his?
Old Jones, have you ever seen Wikileaks home page? It says "We open governments", that is their whole purpose. Transparency in Government. He published the "Chelsea Manning" leaks, who I believe is serving 35 years in prison right now. The Turkey government leaks, etc.
I can't believe you're asking this question.
BECAUSE SHE WAS A PUBLIC SERVANT!
Trump was not.
Do you think I have the right to head over to your home or office and just start reading through your records?
What gives the public the right to full disclosure of a private citizen's personal or business records? Or is freedom of the press the only constitutional right you believe in?
That's coy. Thing is he seems to have tried to time the release of what he does have to save Trump. He started releasing emails MINUTES after the video about Trump came out. Clearly he hoped to distract the media from the sex assaults stories (he failed).
And why isn't he getting things like that video?
And of course the KGB isn't giving him dirt on Trump.
More evidence twitter is colluding with the DNC:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=80&v=vioAjOhhHlI
I've heard this from 2 different people as well
https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=80&v=vioAjOhhHlI
I've heard this from 2 different people as well
Timing couldn't have been more perfect, I agree with that, with that said, you can't sit here and pretend he only leaked about the US government, no government is immune, that's abundantly clear. The leaks have zero to do with Trump, but more to do with transparency for the citizens who are planning to elect their next president. It could have been a race between Bernie and Trump, those leaks were coming out, regardless.
Oh No! The Russians illegally hacked my illegal activities.
More conspiracy theories.
There's nothing illegal in Clinton's emails. Nothing. It's just political realism, you would find the same stuff in Sanders emails or Trump's.
Obviously it's damaging because the emails are candid, discuss strategy to deal with rivals, give unvarnished opinions about others, reveal political calculations. But all politicians do that.
It's disturbing that you want to downplay foreign espionage against a US election though. You are pretty dismissive of the threat that represents.
Nowhere did I say we had a right to compel Trump' to disclose. Trump isn't just any citizen. He's applied to become the top public servant in the land by the most public process we have. And he's made as much capital as he could from Clinton's email sins, but without being even minimally forthcoming about his own doings. I'm interested in seeing the same sauce poured on the gander as he has poured on the goose.
So because he's never served the public a day, you think it's fine for Trump to keep his supposedly smart, legal business dealings and taxes secret from voters? Given the foregone taxes that billion dollar bankruptcy netted him, there's certainly a realistic public interest in the business dealings around it, which as you have said were all deeply rooted in public law and policy. But perhaps that's all in the tax audit, we're unlikely ever to see, but which his secretiveness suggests can't be spun to his benefit. Or is your entire view of his conduct limited to what we can compel, leaving you blind to all else? No matter: How are voters any more hindered in deciding about Hillary because we can't see her emails, than Don has hindered them because we can't see his?.
As for the duty of a public servant, given that her emails were Classified, Secret, Top Secret and such, we'd always have had to trust security-cleared insiders like an FBI Director to tell us about them, and that would be limited to essentially what we already got from just such a source. And as I recall, not only did he determine her wrongdoing didn't merit any charges, but that copis and replies in other repositories meant there was no major deficiency. Like The Don in his bankruptcy court, she's had her wrist legally slapped.
So tell us which of the candidate's records you know the least about,. and who's the one being the least forthcoming to the voters. Don't they have a right to the same honesty and openness from both?
