They consistently concealed evidence against the GOP and Russia, they outright denied claims made against Russia on their official accounts, they repeated Russian propaganda… come on man. It was obvious.
I’m sorry, are you suggesting Russia is somehow communist? They’re fascist, and they’re spreading fascism throughout the world on the internet, and they need to be stopped. […] Right wing radio and youtube hosts across America were caught taking Russian money.
I’m suggesting that what ensued was hysteria. With or without Russia’s financial support, right-wing influencers and spaces have continued to prop up Trump.
What are you talking about? Countless members of Trump’s staff were arrested and sent to jail for being Russian spies. The NRA had a Russian spy funneling money.
I am talking about online discourse, not the failure of the state to protect itself from compromised individuals in high positions.
“Assange, despite his claims to scientific journalism, emphasized to me that his mission is to expose injustice, not to provide an even-handed record of events.”
Why did he feel it was so imperative to fight Clinton? It wasn’t simply because he thought she was a demon. It wasn’t specifically because he was pro-Russia or pro-Trump, even if he did collude with the latter (and former if the Guccifer 2.0 source of leaks is to be believed). I want Buzzfeed’s and whatever else’s source for the leaked DMs between Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0, and Roger Stone can fuck off - I don’t believe a word he says.
That’s every intelligence agency in the country saying you’re wrong.
I don’t see the state operating in my interest or anybody else’s, including its own interest. Things have been quite dysfunctional. Intelligence agencies routinely do not properly cite their sources, does that link provide actual sources instead of “trust me bro”?
Okay, good, we can agree that Russia is our enemy. That’s some common ground we can work from.
Russia is hostile to the US, and the US is hostile to Russia. Everybody is in the crossfire of governments than do not represent or serve them.
Citation needed, citation needed, citation needed. Convince me.
Why did Assange see Clinton as an enemy?
I’m suggesting that what ensued was hysteria. With or without Russia’s financial support, right-wing influencers and spaces have continued to prop up Trump.
I am talking about online discourse, not the failure of the state to protect itself from compromised individuals in high positions.
https://thedispatch.com/article/how-julian-assange-shaped-the-2016-election/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-secret-correspondence-between-donald-trump-jr-and-wikileaks/545738/
https://theintercept.com/2017/11/15/wikileaks-julian-assange-donald-trump-jr-hillary-clinton/
See above sources.
Convince me. Because I’ve posted an overwhelming amount of evidence for you to suggest it was all “hysteria”.
https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICA_2017_01.pdf
That’s every intelligence agency in the country saying you’re wrong.
Okay, good, we can agree that Russia is our enemy. That’s some common ground we can work from.
“Assange, despite his claims to scientific journalism, emphasized to me that his mission is to expose injustice, not to provide an even-handed record of events.”
Why did he feel it was so imperative to fight Clinton? It wasn’t simply because he thought she was a demon. It wasn’t specifically because he was pro-Russia or pro-Trump, even if he did collude with the latter (and former if the Guccifer 2.0 source of leaks is to be believed). I want Buzzfeed’s and whatever else’s source for the leaked DMs between Wikileaks and Guccifer 2.0, and Roger Stone can fuck off - I don’t believe a word he says.
I don’t see the state operating in my interest or anybody else’s, including its own interest. Things have been quite dysfunctional. Intelligence agencies routinely do not properly cite their sources, does that link provide actual sources instead of “trust me bro”?
Russia is hostile to the US, and the US is hostile to Russia. Everybody is in the crossfire of governments than do not represent or serve them.