Why does it loose all credibility?

Being opposed to The Clinton Corruption scam is a non partisan issue.

Wikileaks asked Trump to leak his tax returns doesn’t this make it more likely that they were working with Democrats to get leaks as well?

Working with one political party to take down the other political party is a political issue.

He was working with both - he found Democrats more willing to leak.

Riiight. Let's see the source for that.

Well, someone leaked the DNC’s internal network files to wikileaks. Did you know wikileaks became famous for leaking the Iraq war logs, a direct attack on the Republican Party?

Wait so you are just gonna not prove your point then? You're moving on from the "he worked with both sides" bullshit? Assange didn't like republicans before Trump. Who cares. He still worked day and night to get Trump elected. He was hoping he could get something out of it.

Lol he didn’t expect Trump to win and tried to leak Trump’s tax returns. Have a good day.

Holy shit that's really what you got out of that message? That's hilarious.

Did you know Chelsea Clinton and Ivanka Trump took vacations together. Was Trump colluding with Clinton?

So I guess you're just gonna try to talk about other things now. Cool.

Don’t be stupid. Don Jr. is not the candidate. lol

I don't give a fuck about Ivanka or Trump Jr. This is about Assange being pitted as an agent for the Trump campaign and Russia.

Because he asked for Trump’s tax returns?

BTW Assange is not @wikileaks that’s controlled by the organization...

He asked for something non damaging they could release to pretend they werent working for Trump, yes. And sure enough, that happened. Maddow got one page that told us nothing bad about Trump.

Where's this agenda to help Trump? All I see is a news outlet trying to get information to publish. Once, they ask for a mention. That is how all news outlets operate. You can see literally dozens of journalists doing the exact same thing in the Podesta emails & the DNC leaks. Worse, in fact, because there they talk openly about "friendly" journalists and outlets.

Is this a fuckin joke? He's telling them he wants Trump to give him one miniscule thing to leak so they can pretend they aren't working together. You've gotta be fucking kidding me.

First, that's not at all what it says. They don't say they're working together and they don't plot to pretend they aren't working together. They are asking for information and are giving reasons why it might be in the campaign's interest to provide that information. It's negotiation/sales, and, again, it happens regularly. I can't even tell you the number of times a journo has made a similar pitch to me. It's what they do.

Second, and more importantly, the Trump campaign didn't even respond to that message, nor did they provide any of the requested material. It takes two to work together.

Third, even if they did "work together," which they didn't, but if they did: it ain't illegal. Jesus Christ, you've got at least 100 emails from the DNC side talking about this-or-that reporter will write things favorable to them, you've got some journos regularly sending advice on campaign strategy, etc. It happens ALL THE TIME.

Why does wikileaks need to pretend to be impartial? And I really fuckin wonder if they sent these negotiation emails to the Clinton campaign. "Hillary, we want to help you but we don't want people to find out. Send me something I can leak so nobody can tell I want you to win."

Give me a fuckin break.

Nobody as of now is saying this is illegal. The entire point is Julian Assange is a liar and he's been working on behalf of Russia and the Trump campaign this entire time.

1. It wasn't Assange doing the correspondence. His internet was cut at the time. You'll also note the author refers to Julian in the third person.

2. Guess why they're asking for info on Trump...........because they didn't have any! They are impartial. They publish what they have.

3. Russia Russia Russia! And with that, you've lost all credibility. So I'm going to have to end this conversation now.

If you read the god damn message, they wanted something inconsequential to release so they could pretend they were impartial. They didn't want people to know they were working for Trump and Russia. You've gotta be fucking kidding me. You still think they are impartial. Unfuckinbelievable.

That isn't what it says. This is why I always get near perfect scores on entrance exams and you don't.

That is what it says. You're just pretending it says something else.

I don't think he's portrayed that at all, it's been prerry clear he has an axe to grind against Hillary, but the info he's released has been 100% accurate, regardless of the bias he has.

This says something when he's not willing to say it was from Seth Rich and only hints at it.

I'm not going to pretend I know where the DNC leaks came from, but in Assanges defence he said he doesn't reveal sources because it keep other whistleblowers from approaching him.

They've been shown to be biased against Hillary, but have they been shown to be fabrications?

They haven’t been shown to be biased. They were trying to get Don Jr. to leak to them.

Fair enough. I just always got the impression that Assange didn't hold Hillary in particularly high esteem. With good reason, I might add.

The front page article of the wikileaks about Podesta were about Uranium One and Russian collusion. Democrats came up with their whataboutism way after that.

Well I'd be biased about it if I were him, I mean the whole "can't we just drone him?" was pretty fucked up, not to mention her foreign policy in general. And she absolutely must have suggested the droning, whether in a joking manner or not, or her response when asked about it would have been something more assertive than "I don't recall."

Assange hates all establishment powers. He’s fighting to destroy the outdated idea of the nation state.

That was historically my impression. And she embodied establishment power. I don't really see a problem with it if he is biased. Being biased doesn't make it lies. And they just release everything, so it's not as though their information is editorialized like MSM.

Besides their twitter account was trying to get Donald Trump’s Tax Returns!

How do we know this happened? Because the Atlantic said so? Perhaps if they provided some proof.

They talk about these being admissions and confirmations by Don Jr., how about giving it a read first.

We have. Did you not read the statement by his lawyer confining all this was true?

So they don't show the DMs, they say that they have been given to the grand jury and also "obtained by the Atlantic". The final paragraph says that Don Jr published the emails on his twitter, but those aren't the emails from Wikileaks.

The main issue is that Wikileaks encrypts their messages and signs with their private key. If they publish the DMs it will be simple to prove they are real.

I'm not saying they aren't real, or that wikileaks isn't possibly doing something scummy. I'm saying that we are being told something is true without being shown evidence.

Without evidence it is worthless. Publish the DMs. Prove that they came from Wikileaks. Then we can talk. Until that happens we are being asked to trust them and I'm not going to do that.

All of the info they post is raw info, no spins.

They've never posted anything on Seth Rich. But we know why Julian would pretend it was him. Why wouldn't he? It's clear he works for Trump and Russia.

Knowing what you know about the US, do you really think Russia is the villain in this world?

Knowing what you know about Russia, do you really believe they are considered "the good guys" in any way?

Sure why not? If we're dealing on gradients, they're a fuckuva lot better than we (the US) are. Just bein' honest. Did Russia kill 1 MILLION (that's a lot of people) in Iraq? Nope - we're the scourge of this world - you gotta come to grips with that if you want to change it.

Username checks out

You're full of shit. GTFO.

Ohhh.. shit you're right man. Did you find out that the DKIM verification process was false and definitively proved that the emails were faked?? Oh.. you didn't?

So the emails and many millions of documents on all political parties and many countries that WL has released throughout the years are legit and you're just mad because this one instance doesn't validate you're ridiculous loyalty to a political party that is essentially the same as the other political party in the US? Hmmmm.

Also - how dare you assume my gender :P

Again, you should have context of the US as a power to destroy the world. In that context, any truth that comes out is beneficial to the people. Let the truth on all sides come out and let the people decide how to move. Assange had real reasons to not want the standard oligarchy to continue (direct calls for his droning by HRC notwithstanding). I'd love to see any of us endure what JA has without snapping.

More than anything, I implore you - please stop looking at things through this faux right/left lens. It's not real - the "left" of the US is as far right as any horrid conservative regime worldwide. Picking who would be better between GOP and DNC is splitting hairs.

Because he's useless and lacks the lobbying interests.

Aw well we have to agree to disagree. Obama was a tool of the state like those before him. His job was to expand the empire and he did, so in that sense I guess he was competent. Who knows whether Trump is part of the plan or not. I'm a pacifist so I'm not going to think very highly of any of these politicians. But cheers and g'nite.

There was never any credibility once Wikileaks made themselves part of the Trump campaign.

When did that happen?

I don't know but it became obvious when they began releasing the emails. Emails they claim didn't come from the Russians, but there are now records that the Russians offered them to the Trump campaign earlier than it was know that Wikileaks had them

Whoa, who's reporting that? What records?

Who's reorting that?

Who reported that the emails were offered to the Trump Campaign, before Wikileaks began releasing them to everyone.

I think they were offered to Don Jr in June Wikileaks first release was late in July.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/07/19/an-interactive-timeline-of-key-moments-in-the-trump-russia-investigation/?utm_term=.c79fbb0ee09a

Nice try.

Hillary wanted to drone him. Why does he give a fuck about being impartial?

There are no rules that say Wikileaks is an unbiased entity. With that said, nothing has ever been proven to be false.

What is dropped is Wikileaks decision. Maybe he just doesn’t like Hillary and he was in a position to fuck her the best way he could.

LOL WHAT?..... You have pretty much just now invalidated anything anti wikileaks / pro DNC by this one very statement. |H...H... Hai gaiz, now dat we say assange is bad......c....c...can we forget about da murderz of dat leaker gai?| FUCK... What is wrong with you?

Riiight. Let's see the source for that.

That was historically my impression. And she embodied establishment power. I don't really see a problem with it if he is biased. Being biased doesn't make it lies. And they just release everything, so it's not as though their information is editorialized like MSM.

Why does wikileaks need to pretend to be impartial? And I really fuckin wonder if they sent these negotiation emails to the Clinton campaign. "Hillary, we want to help you but we don't want people to find out. Send me something I can leak so nobody can tell I want you to win."

Give me a fuckin break.

Nobody as of now is saying this is illegal. The entire point is Julian Assange is a liar and he's been working on behalf of Russia and the Trump campaign this entire time.

Besides their twitter account was trying to get Donald Trump’s Tax Returns!

Because he asked for Trump’s tax returns?

BTW Assange is not @wikileaks that’s controlled by the organization...

When did that happen?