Merged All things Trump + Russia

[LSSBB]

Nice to see CE's news consistently comes from Russia.

П₽есститутес

 

[ChristianProgressive]

He says there that he has information that is less controversial than what is already out there. You pretend he said he is withholding something significant, which is total nonsense and goes against the stated principles of wikileaks. And if Assange is anything, he is consistent, which is why I knew that you made it up.

I don't trust Assange's assessment of what he has or doesn't have. Assange has a hate-on for Clinton, in addition to being well known to be a Russian asset, or at least working closely with them. Sources numerous.

(not in chronological order)

http://thefederalist.com/2016/09/09/julian-assange-is-a-russian-front-man-not-a-freedom-fighter/

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/13/politics/russia-us-election/

http://time.com/4625301/cia-russia-wikileaks-dnc-hacking/

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-intelligence-report-wikileaks-russian-hacking-2017-1

http://www.salon.com/2017/01/07/don...e-connected-and-how-they-changed-an-election/


http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...e-intelligence-service-abetted-by-russia.html

https://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/14179240/wikileaks-russia-ties

 

[The Great Zaganza]

In the past, Wikileaks would cooperate with journalists who would sift the leaks and publish only after a public interest was established and the countries in question were given the chance to respond/lodge concerns.

But in the 2016 election, they completely abandoned that method and just dumped a whole cache of emails, without checking once if it was relevant or violated privacy.
They even bragged about the suicide attempt of one of the staffers for whom they planned an intervention in the emails.
And big coincidence: they dropped the email-bomb right after the Hollywood Access Tapes, making it impossible for anyone to figure out if they meant anything.

 

[Stacko]

In the past, Wikileaks would cooperate with journalists who would sift the leaks and publish only after a public interest was established and the countries in question were given the chance to respond/lodge concerns.

But in the 2016 election, they completely abandoned that method and just dumped a whole cache of emails, without checking once if it was relevant or violated privacy.
They even bragged about the suicide attempt of one of the staffers for whom they planned an intervention in the emails.
And big coincidence: they dropped the email-bomb right after the Hollywood Access Tapes, making it impossible for anyone to figure out if they meant anything.

They stopped doing that before the 2016 election. I think the change happened after the Panama Papers came out. They outed a number of rape victims in Saudi Arabia in 2015.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

(1) Obama was POTUS, Trump/Jared were not and (2) Obama didn't try to setup the back channel at a secure Russian facility in order to keep things secret from US officials.

Yours truly,
Captain Obvious

That hasn't stopped the Trumpettes from going out with talking point in-hand to all the news panels.

McMaster spewed more falsehoods this morning, first claiming the contact was legit, ignoring the involvement of a Russian bank and the idiocy of thinking they could just use secure Russian communication from within the embassy. Then he denied knowing if Kushner had top security clearance and said something to the effect that such things are checked depending on information involved in a briefing.

McMaster isn’t fazed by Jared Kushner ‘back-channel’ reports

 

[The Great Zaganza]

McMasters is a cautionary tale: don't think you can prevent the worst of the Trump administration by sticking around.

On the other hand, we haven't died in a mushroom cloud yet, so...


Good job McMasters!

 

[logger]

What's that even mean to you?

More unnamed sources?

 

[snoop_doxie]

Oh, sure! And you don't find that suspicious?

Of course it is suspicious!
There is always a Citgo.

 

[logger]

Obama didn't hack Republicans to get elected It looks Like Trump did.

Trump hacked Republicans?

 

[snoop_doxie]

That's really what it's about to your side, that he got relationships started before he was elected or inaugurated?

They set up back channels with many countries, yes it is obvious that you're full of crap and completely ignorant of how government works. Another reason this is going nowhere is because there isn't collusion, collusion to do what exactly? Let us all know what a POS Hillary Clinton is?

Why is it conservatives/Republicans (or whatever) cannot go a day without
mentioning Clinton.

Methinks they protest too much.

Talk about what is happening in the White House now, with the embarrassment that is in office NOW.

 

[phiwum]

Assange said outright at one point he had dirt on GOP but wouldn't release it.

I wouldn't mind seeing a reference for that. I don't recall it.

Thanks.

 

[jimbob]

I wouldn't mind seeing a reference for that. I don't recall it.

Thanks.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...Trump-compare-comes-Donald-Trump-s-mouth.html

Note he doesn't say he doesn't have the info, but that he won't publish it because (in his opinion) it's not as bad as some of Trump's more public doings.

Hey, Mr "Transparency"...dish the dirt and let US decide. Oh wait, Uncle Vlad wouldn't like that, would he?

From the link

WikiLeaks founder says the problem with leaking material about Trump is that nothing can compare with 'what comes out of Donald Trump's mouth'
Julian Assange said WikiLeaks has 'some information' about Trump's campaign but he can't compete with what the candidate himself says
WikiLeaks has published more than 20,000 documents related to Hillary Clinton, mostly her State Department emails
Assange said Clinton hasn't been attacked enough for spearheading regime change in Libya
He spoke to 'Fox & Friends' from the Ecuadorean embassy in London where he has been holed up for more than five years fighting extradition on a rape allegation in Sweden


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...comes-Donald-Trump-s-mouth.html#ixzz4iUrel06R
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[phiwum]

More unnamed sources?

Ah, very clear. If an article, oh, let's say this one is significantly based on claims from unnamed sources, then we should deem it "fake news". That's the rule, right?

This month, Obama's National Security Council finished an extensive and comprehensive review of U.S policy toward Russia that included dozens of meetings and input from the State Department, Defense Department and several other agencies, according to three senior administration officials. At the end of the sometimes-contentious process, Obama made a decision to continue to look for ways to work with Russia on a host of bilateral and international issues while also offering Putin a way out of the stalemate over the crisis in Ukraine.

Holy cow, logger is citing fake news stories, according to his own (hairbrained) standard. Who would've thought?

 

[Childlike Empress]

From the link

In case you want to take a look at the primary source instead of relying on the Daily Fail, jimbob - I know, why the hassle but that's how I felt so I looked it up. Sharing is caring.

 

[phiwum]

From the link

Thanks, but that excerpt hardly sounds like what CP said:

Assange said outright at one point he had dirt on GOP but wouldn't release it.

It sounds to me like Assange was claiming possession of some damning information about the party, but chose not to release it. Your excerpt says he had some info about Trump, but it wasn't all that scurrilous.

 

[Tony Stark]

So when is Trump going to fire him?

 

[logger]

Okay. I guess it will be fun to talk about Trump after multiple investigations
into his Putin puppet administration.

Did you ever stop and think how utterly impossible it would be for Trump to do Putins bidding here? The left has simply gone off the deep end!

 

[The Great Zaganza]

So when is Trump going to fire him?

just abolish the NSA - Trump can do their job much better, anyways.

 

[Hercules56]

Did you ever stop and think how utterly impossible it would be for Trump to do Putins bidding here? The left has simply gone off the deep end!

If not for the all the hubbub about Trump and Co.'s collussion with Russia and other crimes, Trump would have surely scaled back sanctions against Russia and would be attacking Syria's non-ISIS enemies.

He likely would have also recognized Russia's annexation of Crimea.

 

[logger]

Ah, very clear. If an article, oh, let's say this one is significantly based on claims from unnamed sources, then we should deem it "fake news". That's the rule, right?

Right!

Holy cow, logger is citing fake news stories, according to his own (hairbrained) standard. Who would've thought?

Lol, Phiwum doesn't seem to like examples. Its interesting reading but we sure aren't going to impeach or remove a president from office with unnamed sources.