I wouldn’t characterize him as a Russian spy, more of an asset. Wikileaks selectively released information rather than being the safe harbor for all intelligence leaks that they purported to be.
Someone who worked inside Wikileaks certainly felt they were newsworthy
We had several leaks sent to Wikileaks, including the Russian hack. It would have exposed Russian activities and shown WikiLeaks was not controlled by Russian security services,” the source who provided the messages wrote to FP. “Many Wikileaks staff and volunteers or their families suffered at the hands of Russian corruption and cruelty, we were sure Wikileaks would release it. Assange gave excuse after excuse.”
Foreign Policy endorsed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. This was the first time in its 50-year history the magazine endorsed a candidate.
you will forgive me if i don’t find your source to be credible in this regard.
It’s not a lie, he refused to publish the Kremlin leaks for reasons I found paper thin. Sorry we don’t agree, I’ll refrain from calling you names because what’s the fucking point?
A guy embarrasses the richest and most powerful people in the world by telling you the dirty secrets they were hiding from you. And when they tell you that it’s the messenger who’s the enemy, you believe them SMH.
If you’re against wikileaks, you’re against the rights of journalists and you’re opposed to the freedom of information.
Nope. If NYT wants to publish stuff about warrantless wiretapping that’s fine. More power to them.
WikiLeaks edited video and text content from day 1. The US Army caught them out several times by just releasing the full video. They didn’t even try with the DNC emails, they put sensational headers on them had nothing to do with what was written in the email. Then there’s the revelations of the GOP and RUS hacks which somehow have yet to see the light of day.
So yeah after that fumbling attempt at creating propaganda it wasn’t exactly a surprise to find out the Russian GRU were essentially running the site by the mid 2010’s. Assange went beyond journalism and into foreign agent territory when he edited his stuff out of truthfulness and selectively released documents to influence American politics.
So no you don’t get to tie him to investigative journalism like the Panama Papers.
How is he a Russian spy?
Wiki leaks are published for all to view, not just Russia.
I wouldn’t characterize him as a Russian spy, more of an asset. Wikileaks selectively released information rather than being the safe harbor for all intelligence leaks that they purported to be.
lying shill
S A L T Y
shill
Me or Julian?
you
>Wikileaks selectively released information rather than being the safe harbor for all intelligence leaks that they purported to be.
what makes you think that it was any more than only releasing important leaks? no one cares about the timeclock at mcdonald’s on 5th and main.
Curious how all the leaks about Russia were deemed unimportant
wasn’t he taking asylum in russia? do you really think he should have made enemies there when the US et al were already trying to jail him?
You’re thinking of Snowden. Assange was at an Ecuadorian embassy in London. Two very different cases.
oh. then is there any reason at all to think he got leaks about russia that were worth publishing?
Someone who worked inside Wikileaks certainly felt they were newsworthy
You can read more here
Foreign Policy endorsed Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. This was the first time in its 50-year history the magazine endorsed a candidate.
you will forgive me if i don’t find your source to be credible in this regard.
oh no! the situation is complex and it’s possible that even the best actors had to make some tough decisions.
curious how you’re obsessed with repeating that lie over and over again…
If you say so
keep on obsessively repeating that lie without actually checking it out, then
It’s not a lie, he refused to publish the Kremlin leaks for reasons I found paper thin. Sorry we don’t agree, I’ll refrain from calling you names because what’s the fucking point?
yeah well can you provide a real source for that? maybe other than “one secret person told this paper, and by golly we believe them!”
GRU basically runs WikiLeaks.
Source: dude, trust me
Lmao. I wasn’t born yesterday. There’s been years of news on this. That’s an extremely poor attempt at gaslighting.
There’s been years of propaganda on this.
A guy embarrasses the richest and most powerful people in the world by telling you the dirty secrets they were hiding from you. And when they tell you that it’s the messenger who’s the enemy, you believe them SMH.
If you’re against wikileaks, you’re against the rights of journalists and you’re opposed to the freedom of information.
Nope. If NYT wants to publish stuff about warrantless wiretapping that’s fine. More power to them.
WikiLeaks edited video and text content from day 1. The US Army caught them out several times by just releasing the full video. They didn’t even try with the DNC emails, they put sensational headers on them had nothing to do with what was written in the email. Then there’s the revelations of the GOP and RUS hacks which somehow have yet to see the light of day.
So yeah after that fumbling attempt at creating propaganda it wasn’t exactly a surprise to find out the Russian GRU were essentially running the site by the mid 2010’s. Assange went beyond journalism and into foreign agent territory when he edited his stuff out of truthfulness and selectively released documents to influence American politics.
So no you don’t get to tie him to investigative journalism like the Panama Papers.