- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Assange meets U.S. congressman, vows to prove Russia did not leak him documents
Posted on 8/16/17 at 8:59 pm to Pettifogger
Posted on 8/16/17 at 8:59 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
The documents they release speak for themselves, I agree. Those releases just *happen* to largely impact specific factions of the American political landscape, while having little to no impact on others.
Maybe some specific factions of American politics are not acting so egregiously? Maybe the hillary+podesta emails were released because they exposed collusion within the party, and the "other faction" is clearly are not as organized and collusive because an outsider like Trump can just waltz in and take the nomination?
1
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:01 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Yes. Later in the campaign and to the present, he has more regularly made those type of comments which seem clearly intended to enflame questionable stories in the US.
Could be attention seeking for himself. More likely it is a continuation of what I think his overall goal is - to sow seeds of dissent and upheaval through encouraging the distrust of American institutions.
You seem to conveniently forget the Wikileaks of the Bush era. Maybe its just that the current party he is exposing is the one you side with?
In general it has always been the american view to distrust institutions, thats kind of why we got America in the first place.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:02 pm to GRTiger
quote:
But I agree that his general goal is pulling back the curtain of government corruption and deception. The discord is probably more of a natural byproduct, but I'm sure he doesn't mind it.
See, I'm not sure I agree. I think he intentionally sows discord, and maybe you do too. That's not necessarily mutually exclusive from having some good faith desire to expose corruption and deception, of course.
I'll admit that when it comes to the question of whether his primary intention is to be an advocate for a cause, or to simply shed light on darkness, I let his associates and prior actions influence my beliefs to some extent.
Like everything - cui bono?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:03 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:He has hand delivered documents from the Russian government into Senate hearings. He also got caught trying to have a private showing of a Russian propaganda movie for Senators on his committee.
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher,
Honestly, he's the only person whose name only seems to show up in conversations about Russia.
In fact, I heard an interview with this a person who was a friend of Magnitsky, and personally lobbied for the act. The only person who he was willing to say anything bad about was Rohrabacher.
So I sense that if there is a person in government who is most likely to support Russia, it's this guy.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:04 pm to AMS
quote:
Maybe some specific factions of American politics are not acting so egregiously? Maybe the hillary+podesta emails were released because they exposed collusion within the party, and the "other faction" is clearly are not as organized and collusive because an outsider like Trump can just waltz in and take the nomination?
Could be, but I doubt this. I think the seediness exists for the GOP, and likely for Trump and his associates as well. It's possible you're right, it's possible you're not right and Assange doesn't have the goods, or it's possible Assange has them but has withheld them.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:05 pm to dewster
quote:
Hard to prove that someone didn't do something.
He owns the leak, he can prove who he and DC Leaks received the leaks from...from the receiving end...
Muh 17 Intelligence services...which are proving to be the action arm of the elites
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:06 pm to mmcgrath
demonizing the man already. damn... he must have some real good stuff. so you are calling him basically Boris or what? 
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:07 pm to cajunangelle
quote:I was thinking about things other than this story, but the Seth Rich story is a prime example.
don't overthink. It's like the HIPAA law. it is no longer applicable if someone is dead. Seth Rich is dead so sources can be leaked. at the very least it can be proven that it was'nt the Russians, no?
I mean the man was murdered, and he's feeding the conspiracy theories regarding that murder with his coy comments. At the very least he can put that to rest, and provide a little clarity, but he doesn't.
Even if it was an inside job, he could at least say whether Seth was involved or not. Instead he uses his vagueness to make it seem plausible, while not ever making it seem anything more or less than that. It's just enough fuel to keep a conspiracy going; not enough to give it some credence and not enough to discredit it.
This post was edited on 8/16/17 at 9:18 pm
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:07 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
I understood you to imply that documents haven't been provided to WL for "the other political movement." Is that what you were saying?
Maybe they were provided to WL for "the other political movement". Does that make them any less valid or accurate?
Do you understand the concept of a leak? It isnt a hack. It is however people privy to the information being disseminated deciding that that info should be shared. Recently that was Obama's staff leaking, less recently Bush had some staff leaking.
Leaks are made to be impactful. How impactful would it be to leak the minority power that is not controlling power or abusing power?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:08 pm to AMS
quote:
You seem to conveniently forget the Wikileaks of the Bush era. Maybe its just that the current party he is exposing is the one you side with?
I voted for Trump, and even with my less-than-favorable view of Trump, would never oppose exposure of Hillary/the left.
But if the goal is to diminish the United States, what better way than A) embarrassing us and impeding our moral authority on the world stage and B) helping to promote an outsider whose followers promote distrust of American media, congress, banks, etc.
For the record, I think distrust in untrustworthy institutions is fine. But we're establishing a status quo of distrust with or without basis, which, if I was someone hoping to watch America decline from within, is exactly what I'd want to see.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:09 pm to IceTiger
quote:Meanwhile, he's allowing a witch hunt to continue and snowball. Why?
He owns the leak, he can prove who he and DC Leaks received the leaks from.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:10 pm to AMS
quote:
How impactful would it be to leak the minority power that is not controlling power or abusing power?
Exactly. Which is why the "he did it to Bush" thing has no impact whatsoever on my thoughts regarding the motives of Assange.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:11 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Meanwhile, he's allowing a witch hunt to continue and snowball. Why?
A very good question. Why would he want a very divisive matter in the United States to fester if he could shine his light on it?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:13 pm to Pettifogger
quote:
Could be, but I doubt this. I think the seediness exists for the GOP, and likely for Trump and his associates as well. It's possible you're right, it's possible you're not right and Assange doesn't have the goods, or it's possible Assange has them but has withheld them.
Maybe you are right.
Maybe our intelligence agencies have lied to us time and time again (this is actually not a maybe, they have), and Assange as far as your awareness has not. Maybe that is because intel agencies are given jobs by executives of our gov, and not foreign nationals whose goal is to expose corruption regardless of party in power.
Member Bush WMD leaks? But nah, must be that he is just anti-whoever you support.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:15 pm to Pettifogger
You made a point earlier about it only being against one faction, and I provided an example of it being against another faction, and you think supports that Assange only supports 1 faction?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:15 pm to Seldom Seen
There he is!
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:17 pm to AMS
quote:
Maybe you are right.
Maybe our intelligence agencies have lied to us time and time again (this is actually not a maybe, they have), and Assange as far as your awareness has not. Maybe that is because intel agencies are given jobs by executives of our gov, and not foreign nationals whose goal is to expose corruption regardless of party in power.
Member Bush WMD leaks? But nah, must be that he is just anti-whoever you support.
Speaking of Bush and WMD, intelligence agencies use selective information, rather than or in addition to false information/evidence all the time. Why are you beholden to a position that Assange is some antithesis of our dishonest IC?
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:18 pm to AMS
quote:
You made a point earlier about it only being against one faction, and I provided an example of it being against another faction, and you think supports that Assange only supports 1 faction?
I'm clearly talking about what this thread is talking about, which is Assange in the context of Russia and the 2016 election.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:18 pm to AMS
He clearly indicated he was familiar with the history of WL, and familiar with the documents they have released.
I'm eagerly waiting to see how he continues his "logical" argument.
I'm eagerly waiting to see how he continues his "logical" argument.
Posted on 8/16/17 at 9:24 pm to Iowa Golfer
Never figured you for one with a literacy issue, Iowa. Perhaps you scanned a post of mine, decided you wanted to insert yourself but lacked familiarity with the subject matter? It's a common theme.
Riding the coattails of others is a bad look, regardless.
Riding the coattails of others is a bad look, regardless.
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News