That's it. Fuck you Julian Assange.

[cali]

I can't post the link because it's from a wingnut site, but evidently over the past weekend, WikiLeaks sent out a tweet- and at this point WikiLeaks IS Assange, to its millions of followers with a link to the YouTube "documentary" of 'Clinton Cash'.

Despicable. He's openly trying to interfere with the Presidential elections using scurrilous right wing shit.

Once upon a time ago, WikiLeaks had the potential to be a valuable tool against government malfeasance. Now it is what it purports to fight- corrupt.

So fuck you very much, Mr. Assange.

[KewlKat]

1. Breitbart uploaded a copy on 25 Jul and there are 4 or 5 other full length vids

some as far back as May. Maybe those interested in watching that trash have gotten it out of their system.

Agree that Ass-ange is doing what he can to make drumpf our fuhrer.

[cynzke]

12. ITS NOT TRUMP. ASSANGE VENDETTA AGAINST THE CLINTONS!

https://www.google.com/search?q=Julian%20Assange%20hates%20hillary&oq=Julian%20Assange%20hates%20hillary&ie=UTF-8&aqs=chrome..69i57.4847j0j1&sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&biw=1162&bih=597&dpr=1.25&cad=cbv&bvch=u&sei=dEuZV5jkFJHveLmiuJgJ&rct=j

[randome]

2. It's hard to imagine all this effort being spent on what is clearly a losing candidate.

All the people attaching themselves to Trump and parroting his every utterance. Are they so blind or so desperate they don't see what's happening?

In Assange's case, I guess 'desperation' counts. But all these others? I don't get it.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Meredith McIver approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[underpants]

20. My guess - he's trying to get asylum in Russia

or at least have Putin arrange for asylum somewhere. Assange is probably desperate ate this point, he should know better than getting mixed up with Putin.

[brush]

40. Putin's already got his international defector. Better try something else, Assange.

[Adrahil]

3. He's always been like this.

He isn't interested in you, or "freedom" or "transparency." He never has been. This is, and always has been about him, his ego, and his personal vandettas.

Hopefully, most of the American left is finally over this fraud.

[cali]

6. Yes, he's always been like this, but for a time he was counterbalanced by others

I'm sure you remember the big fallouts most of his one time collaborators had with him.

[Adrahil]

11. Yup, I do. NT

[ehrnst]

10. My Hardcore Bernie or Bust younger brother thinks Assange is an avenging angel

At this point anything that smears Hillary is credible with him.

I'm sure that there are more like him.

[Adrahil]

15. Yup, he's a hero at JPR. NT

[Fast Walker 52]

17. yeah, I was always a little leery of him but thought he was doing something worthwhile

Now I can see he's a piece of shit.

I just hope Democracy Now! stops giving him airtime like he's god. I can't watch that crap.

[joshcryer]

4. After the Moscow files were shunted it became clear Wikileaks is an arm of Russian intelligence.

Of course, the clue was when LulzSec got raided and the entire group of Anonymous hackers (hactivists) was arrested, and Wikileaks promised support but then quietly forget about them. Those guys were going after everyone, and if you were Wikileaks and supported them, that means that your master state could be threatened, can't have that.

Mind you, what LulzSec did was extremely bad, they were responsible for many really terrible leaks and they were relentless with their targets (at the time it was almost mythical how they hacked). But LulzSec comprised the "ethos" of Wikileaks. Full transparency, everything gets leaked, leak it all.

And to allow that to continue to happen with their master state potentially at risk was too much.

Mind you I don't suspect collusion, it's more ideological in my observation than it is infiltration, but it would not surprise me if Wikileak's inner circle has Russian (and even US) moles.

[Sunlei]

25. was a well timed move for the security businesses to release the report that named 2 russian groups

Public would have never known if not for that.

Makes me wonder why Russian Government holds on to any republican files/emails they may have hacked over the years. Blackmail is a very powerful tool.

[Coyotl]

72. Putin and the Russians are the Republican patsies in this case. Republicans are the hackers and

the person leaking is exposing the hackers. This is bigger than Watergate, which started with two phone taps.

[Festivito]

5. No. I say wrongheaded-Assange-bashing aside. Here are "Clinton cash" refutation links.

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factchecks/2015/07/21/paul-debunked-claims/

https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/updates/2015/05/04/10-things/

Or, go to:
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/
and search for Clinton cash. There are videos and articles. I posted article links.

As far as Assange goes. I support him.

[cali]

7. I no longer do. And I haven't for some years. Why? Because WikiLeaks has become his

own little fiefdom. It's about as "wiki" as a hole in the head at this point.

[Festivito]

24. If I started not supporting anything where power went to someones head, I'd support nothing.

Assange supports freedom and transparency through his wikileaks. Those ideas combined with the randomness of how he receives information can lead to wikileaks seemingly to hurt one side of a fight more than another.

We know how Clarence Thomas through his wife's job can receive dirty money. We just don't know when and how much. We should. We should also know what the Clintons receive and answer to it.

And, I'm glad that Hillary does answer it and not leave us dangling the way other candidates have left us.

[cali]

27. bullpucky. His agenda has little to do with freedom at this point.

And even Greenwald and Snowden have expressed their dismay and strongly condemned his release of DNC emails and other materials that contain personal info and contact info.

[Festivito]

33. That would be his own freedom cali. His fight for transparency does then come second.

As it should.

Yes, I would frown at releasing personal information. I do not know why in the this case, wikileaks did not redact. There may be a reason. I can understand dismay. Dismay is not a strong dun.

I do think our American preoccupation with privacy arises from years of bad governance resulting in privately insured health care for one.

[Adrahil]

42. His fight for "transparency"...

Seems to have a very narrow focus. You're being played.

[Festivito]

59. He publishes information he receives. So far, the right wing has not yielded.

I think what you think is happening to me, I think is happening to you.

Good luck.

[mythology]

43. His claim of supporting transparency

Are made a joke when he refuses to deal with the legal repercussions of being being a rapist (not to mention the immorality of being a rapist).

[Festivito]

46. Not really. Personal freedom is very compelling as a superseding argument.

And when both women and several prosecutors say it's not and only one prosecutor says it is, at least call it alleged rape.

[awoke_in_2003]

53. How do you feel about

supporting an anti-Semite?

[Festivito]

58. Don't wish to do it. Note my earlier post.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=8106966

[baldguy]

9. You support the guy who attackes the one person

who stands in way of a nuclear powered fascist dictatorship in America.

The leader of the *Not Hillary* Party, Donald Trump thanks you.

[baldguy]

19. And supporting Assange in being Putin's puppet to attack Clinton won't solve the problem either.

Not nearly.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

14. You're supporting the guy who is promoting "Clinton Cash"?

Yes, we all know it's debunked, but Julian "the antisemitic rapist" Assange is PROMOTING Clinton Cash as if it's real.

And you are proudly supporting him?


Da fuq?

[Festivito]

31. I have dealt with your assertive posts before and they proved to be wrong. eom

[Dr Hobbitstein]

44. Says the guy who supports Trump's biggest supporter.

Who also happens to be an antisemite and a racist. You can try to gloss over it all you want, but Assange is a piece of shit.

[Festivito]

45. Oh my! No. eom

[Adrahil]

18. I think you reconsider support of wikileaks....

in light of crap like this:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/07/25/what_wikileaks_might_have_meant_by_that_anti_semitic_tweet.html

[Festivito]

30. They noticed their detractors were Jewish. I think they did not know why 3 detractors were Jewish.

One was only married to a Jew. Not that it matters.

It could be taken as innocent, but unthinking. Or, it could be taken badly, as trying to point to some huge conspiracy. They deleted it. They have Jewish members on their team.

There are at least three Jewish / Jewish related persons who would like everyone think the bad rather than innocence. And they are vocal.

There are also several Jewish persons who we can be sure see the innocence rather than the bad.

[PufPuf23]

56. www.hillaryclinton.com is a very fast loading web page

for those of use with less than great internet access.

[Politicub]

8. A well-compensated narcissist

Is all Assage amounts to. Piece of garbage then. Bigger piece of garbage now.

[TRoN33]

13. I'm feeling the same about Assange.

He doesn't sound respectable anymore to me.

[FLPanhandle]

21. I'm proud to say that I called him a traitorous, lying, little shit from day one.

He has never had an honorable bone in his body.

[stevenleser]

34. Yep, same here. nt

[Tarheel_Dem]

47. ^^This.

[Egnever]

61. Yup recognized his smarmy butt the first time he posted

His agenda ridden leaks. Glad others are finally recognizing him for what he is though.

[Helen Borg]

22. Right, because people could not find that link with Google...

[Sunlei]

23. I've always wondered why his own country doesn't help him.

[randome]

28. Australia is strangely silent on this asshole, isn't it?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[Coyotl]

73. Because Australia does not help their home grown criminals. D'oh!

"... he hacked into the Pentagon and other US Department of Defense facilities, MILNET, the US Navy, NASA, and Australia's Overseas Telecommunications Commission; Citibank, Lockheed Martin, Motorola, Panasonic, and Xerox; and the Australian National University, La Trobe University, and Stanford University's SRI International.[25] He is thought to have been involved in the WANK (Worms Against Nuclear Killers) hack at NASA in 1989, but he does not acknowledge this.[26][27]

"In September 1991, Assange was discovered hacking into the Melbourne master terminal of Nortel, a Canadian multinational telecommunications corporation.[12] The Australian Federal Police tapped Assange's phone line (he was using a modem), raided his home at the end of October,[28] and eventually charged him in 1994 with 31 counts of hacking and related crimes.[12] In December 1996, he pleaded guilty to 25 charges ...." wiki

[ismnotwasm]

26. Yeah I've been there quite awhile

I don't know if he started out an idealist or what, wikileaks certainly had potential to be a positive force, but once I started researching his shit, it was clear he's a disgusting individual on several levels.

[Initech]

29. Clinton Cash - yet another steaming pile of bullshit brought to you by Fox News.

[geardaddy]

32. Everytime I see his face, I can't help but see Mr. Humphries' face from Are you Being Served

The difference is, hopefully you'll never hear Assange say "I'm freeee!"

[stevenleser]

35. I see the resemblance but ugh, poor Mr. Humphries was a sweet guy who doesnt deserve the comparison

to Assange the ass.

[geardaddy]

37. True.

I just hope to never hear Assange say "I'm freee!" like Mr. Humphries always did.

[Throd]

48. I see the serial killer from "Dirty Harry"

[MineralMan]

36. Assange's political philosophy is essentially anarchistic.

People who laud him for one action he takes can expect to hate him for another. Anarchists have the goal of destroying government. Expect them to attempt to do just that.

Assange is transparent.

[cali]

38. I think his political philosophy is overwhelmed by his personal agenda(s)

[MineralMan]

39. That, too.

Still, he is an anarchist at heart. Or, at the very least, an anarcho-syndicalist.

It's a political philosophy that remains untested, though. With luck, it will remain untested. Like most anarchists, Assange believes that what he believes is better than what everyone else believes. Narcissism underlies most anarchistic philosophy, really.

[Blue_Tires]

41. I warned everyone this was coming after that bullshit in new Zealand

[geek tragedy]

49. Clinton Cash was produced by the people now running Trump's campaign

Assange is a malignant, malicious figure.

[nolabear]

50. I'm glad you brought that up. There are some very tight and disturbing connections here.

Trump-Putin-Russia-Assange-Breitbart-Manafort-it looks a WHOLE lot like they are insinuating themselves deeply into the American political process and trying to pervert it.

And the damned GOP is investigating Hillary's emails for the umpteenth time???

[demosincebirth]

51. We all loved Mr Assange a few years ago.

[Lisa0825]

52. Not all of us.

I was always wary of him, and never thought he was some sort of hero like most here did. I did not believe he was doing what he did for the public good. I just had a really negative feeling about the guy, and when the rape allegations came out, I thought he probably really was the asshole I instinctively thought he was. Now I feel like all my initial misgivings have been proven correct.

[demosincebirth]

60. I always thought he was a self-absorbed opportunist

[awoke_in_2003]

54. I was behind him

until I found out he was an anti-Semite.

[uponit7771]

62. nope...

[gwheezie]

76. Not me

I thought he was filling his own needs.

[Warren DeMontague]

55. He showed his antisemitic ass, too.

fuck the guy.

[Behind the Aegis]

64. That he did.

Though, it is likely not a drawback for many, and may even be a plus for some.

[Jeffersons Ghost]

57. you got that right

[davidn3600]

63. If Assange released Trump's tax returns, everyone here would be calling him a hero

You are angry because he's attacking your candidate.

And is there anything WikiLeaks has leaked that is wrong?

I understand you are upset because everyone seems to be attacking the Democrats. But the reason for that is because the Democrats have controlled the executive for 8 years. Enemies have been made. Assange is in full belief that Obama and Hillary want to take him down. So yeah, he's got some bias against them.

[LiberalLovinLug]

66. I agree

Trumped up rape charges that, as someone also pointed out, both women and the initial lawyers assigned to the case are not agreeing with, charges brought on for the underhanded purpose of extraditing him to the US so he can set an example of what happens to someone that dares to reveal what's behind the curtain.

And if we never supported anyone with personal flaws who would we support? MLK had personal flaws. So did JFK. And so does Hillary Clinton.

Truth is what's important. Demonization of Assange and what he represents is exactly what those working to shut down net neutrality and bringing on the Corporatocracy want. Sad to see so many, even on DU fall for that insidious crap.

[Warren DeMontague]

67. I think leaking peoples' personal information is wrong, yes.

Leaking the names of women in Turkey and putting them in danger? Not cool.

It's not transparency, it's not whistleblowing, it's just being an asshole.

[reorg]

70. Wikileaks was not “putting women in danger”

The person who made these files available posted the following article to correct the record:

What an agenda against WikiLeaks looks like

In short:

1. It’s deliberately misleading.
2. It leaves out a lot of relevant information.
3. It continues to be inaccurate on points despite the author knowing better.
4. It goes out of its way to criticize WikiLeaks, regardless of accuracy or relevance. ...

... not only did she leave out the mention that WikiLeaks didn’t upload, host, or release the files in question, it was deliberately worded to give the false impression that they did. “Wikileaks dumped some 300,000 emails they chose to call ‘Erdogan emails.’ … However, this dump does include massive databases containing sensitive and private information of millions of ordinary people, including a special database of almost all adult women in Turkey.

... before WikiLeaks could release it the full load was dumped online and then made more widely available by The Cthulhu. Her article still does not acknowledge his role or the role of Phineas Fisher, who actually acquired and released the files.

https://glomardisclosure.com/2016/08/08/what-a-hit-piece-against-wikileaks-looks-like/

See also:

The Who and How of the AKP Hack, Dump and WikiLeaks Release

The above mentioned misleading accusations and lies were published by someone called Zeynep Tufekci, a professor who writes articles in the Huffington Post and books with titles such as "Beautiful Tear Gas: The Ecstatic, Fragile Politics of Networked Protest in the 21st Century", uhuh, oh-kay ...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/zeynep-tufekci/wikileaks-erdogan-emails_b_11158792.html

[Warren DeMontague]

77. It doesnt matter who wrote the huffpo article.

Dumping peoples' personal information willy-nilly is irresponsible.

[reorg]

78. which Wikileaks didn't do, as you knew, if you read the previous post n/t

[Act_of_Reparation]

71. My concern is deeper than that.

Wikileaks exists ostensibly to force transparency from the powerful. But what happens when state-sponsored hackers feed information to Wikileaks with the intention of destabilizing a competitor?

Assange needs to sit down and contemplate whether or not that makes him complicit in the very power games he's supposedly out to expose.

[cali]

75. Um. No. I would not be applauding him.

Yes, leaking personal information is wrong.

And man, are you clueless about me and my history here.

Btw, there was always something that rubbed me the wrong way about Assange personally- it has nothing to do with the purported sexual assaults in Sweden. It far precedes that. And much as I appreciate some of the work WikiLeaks has done, I think trying to influence the U.S. election in the way he's proceeding, is contemptible.

I am one of the least rah rah team blue people on DU. Long have been. I don't work that way.

But hey, I don't mind getting bullshit thrown at me out of ignorance. It's not evidence of my stupidity.

[BainsBane]

65. Evading rape charges did it for me

I'm not ashamed to say I told people so.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

74. Indeed.

And there are those on this site (and in this thread) who still defend him against that, and his antisemitism.

[Maru Kitteh]

68. K&R. Agree. Fuck you very much Assange, you raping piece of shit.

[ileus]

69. Either get back to exposing republicans or we're not going to support you.