http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...overnment.html

So, who do you trust more, Julian Assange, or the CIA?

lol yeah exactly

Why can't it be some ****bag who also has worked closely with the Rooskies in the past?

indeed, why would assange lie?

The whole Russia hacked the election story is so obviously a strategical move by Obama and Co. to delegitimize Trump. I have no idea what is true anymore but true or not it is a smart move by the left.

BREAKING: Assange says he was duped by russian intelligence agents

BREAKING: Assange admits to cooperating with russian government in disseminating hacked emails


it seems like even if he did know for sure it was russian government officials hacking and giving him the ****, it would absolutely devastate his already shaky credibility. i mean who the **** would ever go to his website again?

it's not as if he's practicing journalism. he runs a website for leaks it's not crazy to imagine he got played

so theres that.

And, the CIA would prefer headlines that delegitimize WikiLeaks, because WikiLeaks has been a thorn in their side, such as this video.



Side note, even if it were the Russians that leaked the above video, I'd watch.

If sources are designed to be anonymous, how can he know?

https://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/commen...ditor/d9utp64/

I think "hobble" is a better term than "delegitimize" in this instance.

Russia probably did hack the DNC but they probably were not the only ones who did. Assange probably did not get the information directly from the Russians.

I trust the CIA and Assange more than I trust the Obama administration.

The thing is, Trump is so effusive of praise to Putin, so friendly. It's the only thing he's been consistent on. It's probably the thing he's most defensive about ("You're the puppet. You're the puppet."). I get distrusting the CIA and all, but Trump's treatment of him, the ties by Carter Page, Paul Manafort, Michael Flynn, and assuredly others, the fact that Ivanka and Putin's girlfriend went on vacation together (snopes gets the story right but insists on burying the lede)...

Look. I understand the Right ignoring all this. They won and want their hands clean, so deny deny deny. But some of the far Left? Of all the stuff they buy this one's a step too far?

if youre gonna be a fact checker jefe you shouldnt promote stories like wendi and putin. unless youve got more than the snopes article.

ok.



https://twitter.com/JesseLehrich/sta...93219814187009

The ones leaking the information isn't necessarily the ones doing the hack. So you can trust both without contradiction.

And that "Fancy Bear" (a known GRU proxy) was behind the hack is not only alleged by the CIA, also independent cybersecurity firms have stated this.

My vote for Assange should have been a vote for CIA.

Bloody missclick.

They say it because the phishing domain used to hack the dnc resolved to an ip used by previous fancy bear hacks. There's more, but the russians weren't really trying to hide it. You don't have to rely on experts, you can just look at the evidence.

Assange has no credibility so there is that.

Assange hosted a TV show on a Russian propaganda network.

Lol the whole thing started when nobody thought trump could win. Try again.

Puppet

Still waiting for a reason why all our intelligence and law enforcement agencies and multiple private internet security firms would lie about this. You gotta go pretty far down the conspiritarding rabbit hole to come up with a story.

Link? Id like to review the evidence.

Just wanna be clear: The theory here is that voters who otherwise would've voted Clinton were unduly influenced by the contents of emails illegally obtained by Russian hackers (and distributed by WikiLeaks)? Like, they were were all about Pantsuit Nation, but then read Podesta's risotto recipe and thought "my stars!" and switched their votes to Trump? Like, I believe the hacks happened, I just don't get why they supposedly matter.

You are ascribing way too much credit to the American voter. All they hear is "EMAILS! HACKS! HILLARY!" and throw their hands up in disgust.

this (edit: should add that even if Assange does know who the source is, how can he know they weren't given the information by Russia? His denial is actually phrased to allow this possibility, Hannity asked if he got the information from anyone associated with Russia and Assange merely denied that the source was a Russian state party)

and this. In the utter absence of any plausible alternative story, Occam's Razor should prevail. The very simple explanation is that Russia wanted Trump to win and hacked and then selectively leaked information to that end. It gives everyone reasonable motivations and neatly explains a lot of stuff. Alternative explanations are orders of magnitude more complex.

I especially liked the way that when this whole thing came up people were like OBAMA IS TRYING TO START A WAR WITH RUSSIA! Then when he just expelled some diplomats and whatnot, we get this, from Craig Murray:

The fact that he didn't start a war PROVES it was all lies all along!