Assange To Hannity: Source For WikiLeaks Was Not Russian Government

AlbqOwl · Jan 3, 2017

Nap said:
This is the 3rd or 4th time he has came out and said this. It doesn't matter to the people that simply want to believe it had to be the Russians. I don't know who is worse, the neocons that want to start war with Russia or the DNC trying to discredit wikileaks for exposing their corruption.

You have to understand that Assange is screwing up the narrative. They couldn't get any traction blaming Comey for the Democrats' losses, not only of the Presidency, but failure to retake the Senate, and loss of more governorships and state legislatures.

But they were getting a bit of righteous indignation out of blaming the Russians. If that is exposed as not being a factor--I think most of us probably haven't bought into that anyway--then who do they blame? Certainly not themselves or their failed policies,

Tigerace117 · Jan 3, 2017

ocean515 said:
I think it would be hard to believe the guy.

However, the real objective here is to get everyone to focus on the who did it, rather than on what was revealed.

Political slight of hand hoping the gullible pay attention to what the left hand is doing while the right hand plays them like a fiddle.

I think the "who did it" is arguably just as important, however. Putin has shown he is more than willing to attempt to undermine our security and national interests--- that was his job for many years--- so we have to carefully consider the implications of allowing him influence in our electoral system.

Socrates1 · Jan 3, 2017

Nap said:
This is the 3rd or 4th time he has came out and said this. It doesn't matter to the people that simply want to believe it had to be the Russians. I don't know who is worse, the neocons that want to start war with Russia or the DNC trying to discredit wikileaks for exposing their corruption.

Isn't something when all the deomRAT focus is on WHO leaked the information and NOT on what is contained in those emails ? Has that party lost all sense of values and morals yet ? The information was true and the voters got to see it whats wrong?

haymarket · Jan 3, 2017

Erod said:
Neither of us do.

See your admission that you DO NOT have the data to submit. Please do not speak for me.

AlbqOwl · Jan 3, 2017

Fletch said:
Stop it. Not one of those emails was either to or from Hillary. They were mildly embarrassing to the democrat party--which really isn't true either since liberals have no shame--but largely left Hillary untouched. This is nothing more than liberal Russophobia and an attempt to delegitimize Trump. I doubt those leaks swayed a single vote

My sentiments exactly. I would be hugely amazed if anybody anywhere in the country based their votes on anything Wikileaks released. Hillary supporters shrugged them off or didn't believe them; Trump supporters were already going to vote for Trump or at least knew they weren't going to vote for Hillary.

I personally am far more concerned that the Chinese were able to hack into a supposedly very secure government system and obtain personal information on thousands of government employees as well as private systems containing credit card information and other personal information on millions of us. THAT should be a huge deal to all of us. That the Democrats got an e-mail system hacked by somebody is not unimportant, but it pails when we look at the ramifications of the more serious incidents.

It also should illustrate how serious Hillary's unsecured e-mail server should be to all of us.

But we really have no leg to stand on to be indignant that other countries are trying to hack our stuff when we do the same to them. Countries have been spying on each other probably for all of human history.

haymarket · Jan 3, 2017

Gill said:
Yep, the polls tightened significantly well before Comey's October 28 announcement.

View attachment 67211920

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...announcement-changed-their-vote-be-skeptical/

Your own source clearly said that 4 percent of voters were impacted by the Comey letter. That is more than enough to tilt the election in states like Michigan and Wisconsin and Pennsylvania - without which Trump would have lost the EC.

Trump won Michigan by 0.3%
Trump won Wisconsin by 1.0%
Trump won Pennsylvania by 1./2%

All are well within that 4% shift that your own Monmouth poll accepts.

In addition the other factor comes into play - the wikileaks information which started BEFORE that time period of the Oct 28 announcement. This analysis backs that up

CLINTON POLL SLUMP: Could Assange's Wikileaks releases give Donald Trump the White House? | World | News | Daily Express

How Much Did Wikileaks Hurt Hillary Clinton? | FiveThirtyEight

So when you combine the negative effect of both the Comey letter and the wikileaks barrage daily for weeks - the effect harmful to Clinton and certainly did shift the election from her to Trump allowing him the narrow EC win.

Fenton · Jan 3, 2017

Tigerace117 said:
And why should we believe what a hack like Assange says?

Because if we're really the Russiansame and they really wanted to hurt her changes they would have released her Emails, not Podestas

Tigerace117 · Jan 3, 2017

Fenton said:
Because if we're really the Russiansame and they really wanted to hurt her changes they would have released her Emails, not Podestas

Your post makes very little sense. Who are the "Russiansame"? Do you mean the Russians?

Judging from the level they were able to hurt her just through Podesta's emails, no, not necessarily. And the call for a foreign power to interfere in our election(release the emails if you have them wink wink nudge nudge) was rather classless.

Fletch · Jan 3, 2017

haymarket said:
The reality is that almost all the polls showed a swing away from Clinton and to Trump over the last ten days. So we have to look at what changed in that time period as Trump was still Trump and Clinton was still Clinton.

What changed was the Comey letter and the wikileaks daily barrage and the use of both by Trump to paint the picture of Clinton to his advantage.

The daily release of what was reported to be information damaging to Clinton had its effect. Just look how Trump used it on the campaign trail for the past two weeks.

To pretend to ignore that reality is to play ostrich with the truth.

It was Comey who altered the trajectory of the campaign, not the leaks. The leaks were a wash, actually. They played against the democrat party more than Hillary and Hillary and the dems were able to use the leaks as a way to smear Trump with Putin. Hillary lost and the leaks had nothing to do with it.

Fletch · Jan 3, 2017

Tigerace117 said:
Your post makes very little sense. Who are the "Russiansame"? Do you mean the Russians?

Judging from the level they were able to hurt her just through Podesta's emails, no, not necessarily. And the call for a foreign power to interfere in our election(release the emails if you have them wink wink nudge nudge) was rather classless.

Define this supposed 'level.' Not one email to or from Hillary was released. The leaks made certain low level democrat apparatchiks look a bit slimy, but who needed leaks to believe that. Fenton is right, if the Russians truly wanted to hurt Hillary they need have released just one of here missing emails.

PirateMk1 · Jan 3, 2017

haymarket said:
When you assemble your list of villains, please add Americans who are more than willing to turn a blind eye to a shuttle foreign power influencing our own elections and helping to install a leader of their own choice who they apparently believe will benefit their own agenda and goals.

We have been doing the same ourselves to other countries, Israel's elections the most obvious to come to mind. Our intervention was far more blatant. As far as I am concerned the Russians did us a favor, assuming they did anything at all.

Tigerace117 · Jan 3, 2017

Fletch said:
Define this supposed 'level.' Not one email to or from Hillary was released. The leaks made certain low level democrat apparatchiks look a bit slimy, but who needed leaks to believe that. Fenton is right, if the Russians truly wanted to hurt Hillary they need have released just one of here missing emails.

She was hit by "guilt by association". The damage the release of those emails did was immense, especially since I have no doubt the Russians and the individuals from Wikileaks delibrately chose the most provactive emails to release. This naivety that the Russians didn't really want to hurt Hilary is amusing. Putin is KGB(even though the organization has had a name change). He knows exactly how to play the western public and especially how to play people like Trump.

Erod · Jan 3, 2017

haymarket said:
See your admission that you DO NOT have the data to submit. Please do not speak for me.

This nonsense is so tired and obvious, it is not worthy of discussion. Keep telling yourselves whatever you need to keep you out of therapy.

haymarket · Jan 3, 2017

Fletch said:
It was Comey who altered the trajectory of the campaign, not the leaks. The leaks were a wash, actually. They played against the democrat party more than Hillary and Hillary and the dems were able to use the leaks as a way to smear Trump with Putin. Hillary lost and the leaks had nothing to do with it.

Can you prove that with data?

haymarket · Jan 3, 2017

PirateMk1 said:
We have been doing the same ourselves to other countries, Israel's elections the most obvious to come to mind. Our intervention was far more blatant. As far as I am concerned the Russians did us a favor, assuming they did anything at all.

So they helped somebody who you favored and thats all right with you. WOW!!!!!! :doh:shock::roll:

haymarket · Jan 3, 2017

Erod said:
This nonsense is so tired and obvious, it is not worthy of discussion. Keep telling yourselves whatever you need to keep you out of therapy.

I see the personal insult - but where is the data to support your claims?

bubbabgone · Jan 3, 2017

Grim17 said:
So based on this, what exactly did the Russians do that effected the presidential election?

Assange To Hannity: Our Source Was Not The Russian Government | Video | RealClearPolitics

Assange's answer didn't address the provision "or anybody associated with Russia" in the question.
He answered " ... not the Russian government and it is not a state party.".

Erod · Jan 3, 2017

haymarket said:
I see the personal insult - but where is the data to support your claims?

Polls tighten right before every election.

But by their very nature, they are inexact and bound to the practices and biases of those doing the polls. The mainstream media oversamples Democrats all the time. It was patently obvious they were trying to sway people away from Trump, then they started providing REAL polling right before the election to save face.

Happens all the time.

NonoBadDog · Jan 3, 2017

Grim17 said:
So based on this, what exactly did the Russians do that effected the presidential election?

Assange To Hannity: Our Source Was Not The Russian Government | Video | RealClearPolitics

There is a huge gap in the theory that the Russians had anything to do with the election. The Russians probably do have an active program to hack some of our govt and political systems. Assange did release DNC and Podesta emails that were hacked. There is a void of proof that either has anything to do with the other. There is no proof that the Russians gave Assange the emails. The Russians weren't the only ones hacking the DNC and DCCC servers and Podesta's emails.

Hackers Claim They Wiped John Podesta's iPhone

A hacker also appears to have uncovered the passwords to dozens of senators’ email addresses, as well as social security numbers and credit card info for many Democrats including Vice President Joe Biden, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, and acting Chair of the DNC Donna Brazile. The information was posted to pastebin.

LeakedIn » Blog Archive » Leaked Data

Detected 1 occurrence(s) of ‘leaked (by|from)’:

when I say this, none of the DNC members will comply to reply with the queries related to recent DNC hacks at least till the elections are not over Generally I release my leaks in a format so that a general audience can easily comprehend the data that was leaked by performing the hacks. But this time just to prove my point that DNC is not "un-hackable" and to provide a substantial proof of the actual system structure used by the DNC servers, starting from DNC donation collecting server to DNC file hosting system and

Detected 79 occurrence(s) of ‘[\s\|,;’]+[a-z0-9\-\._]+@[a-z0-9\-\.]+\.[a-z]{2,4}[\s\|,;:’]+’:

Password : 85startrek58
Visa : 4539 4720 7885 305X
CVV2 : 888
Expires : 1/2017

Name : Tony Carrk
Email : tcarrk@hillaryclinton.com
Password : theman777
Mastercard : 5365 7133 7423 531X
CVC2 : 556
Expires : 5/2017

Name : Varun Anand
Email : vanand@hillaryclinton.com
Password : vanand#1601
Mastercard : 5435 6187 7125 134X
CVC2 : 260
Expires : 11/2021

-- CyberZeist
twitter.com/cyberzeist

The site above gives more information about his hack of the "clinton.com" server along with a link to pastebin with all the information about how he hacked the DNC server on Aug 12th. He also includes usernames and passwords along with information about all of the credit cards for most of the people that used the DNC server.

PirateMk1 · Jan 3, 2017

haymarket said:
So they helped somebody who you favored and thats all right with you. WOW!!!!!! :doh:shock::roll:

They just provided information this is of course assuming it was in fact the Russians. I don't have problem with that. I guarantee you we have been in their computers for far longer than they have ours.

bubbabgone · Jan 3, 2017

calamity said:
lol...all of a sudden the hacks on the Right believe Assange. Well, at least there is one person on Trump's team who is not an idiot.

Adviser contradicts Trump: Russians hacked the US - CNNPolitics.com

That comment by Woolsey was the squishiest "contradiction" ever captured on video or in print.
Not worthy of the word but not at all unexpected these days.

polgara · Jan 3, 2017

Tigerace117 said:
Your post makes very little sense. Who are the "Russiansame"? Do you mean the Russians?

Judging from the level they were able to hurt her just through Podesta's emails, no, not necessarily. And the call for a foreign power to interfere in our election(release the emails if you have them wink wink nudge nudge) was rather classless.

Greetings, Tigerace117. :2wave:

I kinda hate to bring this up, but when have politics ever NOT been classless? It has only ever been the degree of classlessness that changes, IMO! :mrgreen:

ocean515 · Jan 3, 2017

Tigerace117 said:
I think the "who did it" is arguably just as important, however. Putin has shown he is more than willing to attempt to undermine our security and national interests--- that was his job for many years--- so we have to carefully consider the implications of allowing him influence in our electoral system.

As I wrote, nothing wrong with tightening up our security, but running with unsubstantiated rumors and pointing fingers in an attempt to destabilize and delegitimize an election is probably just as damning as a foreign country trying to do the same.

There is no proof, lot's of denials, and certainly a media willing to continue with the lies and distortions they used in an attempt to get Hillary elected (i.e.: WaPo, Utility hacked by Russia).

Again, when Hillary introduced her song and dance routine at the debate in order to run from the damning evidence in the emails, the people have been left with nothing but spin and memes. Some are more hungry to fall pray to them than others.

Fenton · Jan 3, 2017

Tigerace117 said:
Your post makes very little sense. Who are the "Russiansame"? Do you mean the Russians?

Judging from the level they were able to hurt her just through Podesta's emails, no, not necessarily. And the call for a foreign power to interfere in our election(release the emails if you have them wink wink nudge nudge) was rather classless.

Stupid phone and it's predictive text. The Russians would have released HER Emails, and not relegated their supposed interference to a phishing scam on Podesta

jonny5 · Jan 3, 2017

KevinKohler said:
Let me ask you folks a question. Pretend you are a member of either congress or the intelegence community. You suspect Russia hacked an email account for a government official, but have evidence that does not conclusively prove anything. Do you...announce to the world, and thus your suspect, that you suspect them, and are investigating them? No, right? No DA in the world would let a cop do that, so why would these super smart CIA guys do it? And further, why it even if you do have something conclusive? What's the goal? Turning the American people against Russia? Putin? Or just to delegitimize Trump? If it were me, I'd keep it quiet, and set up a "mouse trap" for them, to catch them red handed, and then use that as leverage against Putin, via the global community. Blackmail, if you. But no, we tipped our hand. Why?

Playing devils advocate, they have a duty to answer to congress. Congress asked about it, they have to answer, so long as its not exposing secrets to the public.

Assange To Hannity: Source For WikiLeaks Was Not Russian Government

Hates Kittens