PDA

View Full Version : "Not Russia." WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange Ready to Reveal Proof Russia Didn’t Hack the DNC




goldenequity
08-17-2017, 06:56 AM
REPORT: WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange Ready to Reveal Proof Russia Didn’t Hack the DNC
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/08/report-wikileaks-julian-assange-ready-reveal-proof-russia-didnt-hack-dnc/

In a major development, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told Rep. Dana Rohrabacher
that he is ready to provide information proving Russia did not hack the Democratic National Committee.

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, a California Republican who is friendly to Russia and chairs an important House subcommittee on Eurasia policy,
became the first American congressman to meet with Assange during a three-hour private gathering at the Ecuadorian embassy in London,
where the WikiLeaks founder has been holed up for years,




Rohrabacher recounted his conversation with Assange to The Hill.

“Our three-hour meeting covered a wide array of issues, including the WikiLeaks exposure of the DNC emails during last year’s presidential election,”
“Julian emphatically stated that the Russians were not involved in the hacking or disclosure of those emails.
Pressed for more detail on the source of the documents, Rohrabacher said he had information to share privately with President Donald Trump.
“Julian also indicated that he is open to further discussions regarding specific information about the DNC email incident that is currently unknown to the public,” he added.





As TGP previously reported, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange told John Pilger in an exclusive interview
that it wasn’t Russia who hacked into the DNC and Clinton staff emails.

Russia Today reported (https://www.rt.com/news/365164-assange-interview-wikileaks-russia/):

In a John Pilger Special, to be exclusively broadcast by RT on Saturday courtesy of Dartmouth Films,
whistleblower Julian Assange categorically denied
that the troves of US Democratic Party and Clinton work and staff emails released this year
have come from the Russian government.

“The Clinton camp has been able to project a neo-McCarthyist hysteria that Russia is responsible for everything.
Hillary Clinton has stated multiple times, falsely, that 17 US intelligence agencies
had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications.
That’s false – we can say that the Russian government is not the source,” Assange told the veteran Australian broadcaster
as part of a 25-minute John Pilger Special, courtesy of Dartmouth Films.

TGP also reported (http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/01/breaking-sean-hannity-sit-interview-julian-assange-not-russia/) back in January that Sean Hannity landed a sit-down interview with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange.
Assange explicitly told Hannity ‘it was not Russia’.

Julian Assange has repeatedly confirmed that the Russian government was not the source of the DNC leak, however;
Barack Hussein Obama and the fake news media continue to blame Russia for interfering with the U.S. election.

Wikileaks has a 10+ year flawless history of releasing authentic information
while the Obama Administration has been caught lying too many times to count.

acptulsa
08-17-2017, 08:10 AM
So? The media suddenly stopped talking about that like flipping off a switch more than fifteen minutes ago, and everyone has forgotten about it already. Especially since a fine distraction was engineered since then, to make us even more divided than that topic ever did.

goldenequity
08-17-2017, 08:32 AM
What screams out is that it's not about guilt or innocence.
There IS no crime. There was no crime.
Julien is a political prisoner who remains 'captive' and threatened
by a system of tyranny and cowards with 'secrets'.
There is nothing to 'pardon'. He's what journalism should be: a check to power.

You wouldn't NEED to establish 'freedom' of the 'press'
if that wasn't the POINT of the Founders in declaring it.

shakey1
08-17-2017, 08:40 AM
All well & good, but how to bring it to the attention of the American people, most of whom get there news spoon fed to them from MSM outlets?

goldenequity
08-17-2017, 08:44 AM
All well & good, but how to bring it to the attention of the American people, most of whom get there news spoon fed to them from MSM outlets?
Trump.

(but will he have the gonads? No. cuz 'politics'.
Like I said: cowards & a 'political' prisoner. Sad.)

acptulsa
08-17-2017, 08:53 AM
Trump.

Trump never contradicts The Narrative unless it's something everyone already knows. He said Antifa was just as bad as the permitted protestors in Charlottesville because everyone knew Antifa was worse--they threw the first punch. And by saying anything that contradicted The Narrative, he built up his street cred, even though he could have and should have gone much farther.

And the game continues.

roho76
08-17-2017, 10:51 AM
At this point, I'm convinced that the best thing for the people of this planet is a world wide EMP. Shut off all electronic forms of communication. This is the only salvation for humans. At that point we'd all have to go outside and talk to our neighbors and realize that they're not bad people.

dannno
08-17-2017, 11:02 AM
Trump never contradicts The Narrative unless it's something everyone already knows. He said Antifa was just as bad as the permitted protestors in Charlottesville because everyone knew Antifa was worse--they threw the first punch. And by saying anything that contradicted The Narrative, he built up his street cred, even though he could have and should have gone much farther.

And the game continues.

What?? Everyone??

Are you kidding? The narrative is that the left were peaceful protesters and Donald Trump is supporting Nazis. Most people have no idea there was violence coming from the left, the media never played those clips.

acptulsa
08-17-2017, 11:07 AM
What?? Everyone??

Are you kidding? The narrative is that the left were peaceful protesters and Donald Trump is supporting Nazis. Most people have no idea there was violence coming from the left, the media never played those clips.

Yes. Everyone--or close enough for government work.

This was such common knowledge that even the people with blinders on couldn't avoid being exposed to the actual facts. People could vociferously deny and denounce the truth. But the number who actually avoided hearing it don't amount to one percent of the population.

dannno
08-17-2017, 11:14 AM
Yes. Everyone--or close enough for government work.

This was such common knowledge that even the people with blinders on couldn't avoid being exposed to the actual facts. People could vociferously deny and denounce the truth. But the number who actually avoided hearing it don't amount to one percent of the population.

I don't think I buy that at all, but I guess, that's like, your opinion, man. We will see.

acptulsa
08-17-2017, 11:17 AM
I don't think I buy that at all, but I guess, that's like, your opinion, man. We will see.

And your opinion is you're the only person in the world smart enough to ever even be able to read any source but the mainstream media. Even though you've demonstrated repeatedly that you can't distinguish true alternative news sources from the Mainstream Media--Controlled Opposition Division.

dannno
08-17-2017, 11:25 AM
And your opinion is you're the only person in the world smart enough to ever even be able to read any source but the mainstream media. Even though you've demonstrated repeatedly that you can't distinguish true alternative news sources from the Mainstream Media--Controlled Opposition Division.

What??

You are arguing that EVERYBODY knows Trump is right about this, so you are arguing that EVERYBODY reads sources other that mainstream media.. You have the logic completely backwards.

But the truth is somewhere in the middle. Most people don't even pay attention to the media, they just hear whatever second hand, from the majority of people who do pay attention unfortunately still rely heavily on MSM.

jllundqu
08-17-2017, 11:26 AM
I'm not holding my breath for anything groundbreaking to come from this. Julian promised so much during the campaign and he failed to deliver. He's suspect.

Champ
08-17-2017, 11:41 AM
He's suspect.

Could you elaborate?

nikcers
08-17-2017, 11:55 AM
Could you elaborate?

Some of our members died holding their breath for the October surprise of last year that was supposed to land Clinton in jail. At least they stopped posting after it didn't happen.

dannno
08-17-2017, 12:03 PM
I'm not holding my breath for anything groundbreaking to come from this. Julian promised so much during the campaign and he failed to deliver. He's suspect.

I thought Donald Trump won :confused:


Some of our members died holding their breath for the October surprise of last year that was supposed to land Clinton in jail. At least they stopped posting after it didn't happen.

Which ones :confused:

I think more people who were certain Clinton was going to win stopped posting. At least for a while. Then they still welched on their bets.

Jamesiv1
08-17-2017, 12:09 PM
Trump never contradicts The Narrative unless it's something everyone already knows. He said Antifa was just as bad as the permitted protestors in Charlottesville because everyone knew Antifa was worse--they threw the first punch. And by saying anything that contradicted The Narrative, he built up his street cred, even though he could have and should have gone much farther.

And the game continues.I disagree that "everyone knew about Antifa"

I haven't seen anything in MSM calling out Antifa as the assholes they are. If one spends no time watching tubes of InfoWars, Lauren Southern, Mark Dice, etc - in other words, already a conspiracy-head, then all you know is what CNN tells you.

Unlike folks in this Esteemed Forum©

Champ
08-17-2017, 12:19 PM
Some of our members died holding their breath for the October surprise of last year that was supposed to land Clinton in jail. At least they stopped posting after it didn't happen.

Thanks. Would like to hear from the person I quoted, however, to get some of his insight.

goldenequity
08-17-2017, 12:51 PM
'October surprise' is a generic term.. here's 15 of them (http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/october-surprises-214320).
2016's October surprise was supposed to be a 'release' by Wikileaks that would 'land Hillary in jail'..
it was much anticipated, 'promised' by Assange and never delivered.
If you remember... He went 'dark'...
for months.
We have NO idea what happened. Still don't.

UWDude
08-17-2017, 08:52 PM
I'm not holding my breath for anything groundbreaking to come from this. Julian promised so much during the campaign and he failed to deliver. He's suspect.

failed

to

deliver



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/


He's suspect.

I trust him 1,000,000 times more than I would ever trust anything from you.

nikcers
08-17-2017, 09:29 PM
failed

to

deliver



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/


I trust him 1,000,000 times more than I would ever trust anything from you.
I think he was compromised last year- there's a good chance that they are using him to threaten Russia with material compromising to their government. Either that or they are just targeting him, but I think if they were going to target him it would of been last year during the election.

jllundqu
08-18-2017, 09:58 AM
failed

to

deliver



LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

http://www.mostdamagingwikileaks.com/


I trust him 1,000,000 times more than I would ever trust anything from you.

Awwww.... did I hurt your feewings?

Wikileaks is an interesting case. Julian's motives are what I question. Everything he does must be looked at through the lens of someone who is a political prisoner who would do anything to 'be released.' That's all he wants, is his freedom, and he will broker whatever info he can to get it.

Don't take shit so personal.

UWDude
08-18-2017, 10:05 AM
Awwww.... did I hurt your feewings?

No, sorry. I lololololol'ed because of how devoid of reality your statements here are.


Julian's motives are what I question.

You question everybodies motives, which is not exactly bad, but it certainly does not mean you are right.


Everything he does must be looked at through the lens of someone who is a political prisoner who would do anything to 'be released.' That's all he wants, is his freedom, .

If all he wanted was his freedom, he would have never risked it by becoming the spokesman for wikileaks. Get a grip.

goldenequity
08-19-2017, 11:38 AM
https://archive.is/858Tw/00a332973e5ece3ccf69294600d6f38a67343d7a/scr.png


Charles C. Johnson who set up Assange meeting refuses to cooperate with Senate intelligence probe (http://archive.is/858Tw)
http://archive.is/858Tw

"I'm absolutely not" going to cooperate with the committee, Charles C. Johnson said in an interview after returning from London,
where he had set up a meeting this week between Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., and Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy.

"They're going to have to subpoena me and then they'll be sorely disappointed,"

Johnson said he and Rohrabacher came back from their meeting
with a specific proposal:


Grant a preemptive pardon to Assange (who has been under Justice Department investigation for years, although he has never been charged)
and the WikiLeaks founder would, in exchange,
turn over "irrefutable" evidence that he didn't get the Democratic National Committee emails from Russia, but from another source.

Assange wants to have a deal with the president," Johnson said.
"He believes he should be pardoned in the same way that Chelsea Manning was pardoned."
Once Assange turns his evidence over, showing the Russians were not the source of the DNC emails,
then the "president could put the kibosh" on the whole Russia investigation
being conducted by special counsel Robert Mueller.

Johnson declined to say what Assange's supposed evidence actually is (though he did say it did not include any documents).
But he insisted he has spoken to unidentified figures in the White House
who have told him the president wants to hear the proposal.

"I know the president is interested in this," he said. "There will be a meeting between Rep. Rohrabacher and President Trump."

A spokesman for Rohrabacher confirmed that Johnson had arranged the meeting between the congressman and Assange.
"My understanding is that there is not yet a concrete proposal,
but that Dana does believe that if Assange does turn over the proof he's promised,
then he deserves a pardon," the spokesman said.

Zippyjuan
08-19-2017, 11:43 AM
Grant a preemptive pardon to Assange (who has been under Justice Department investigation for years, although he has never been charged)
and the WikiLeaks founder would, in exchange,

turn over "irrefutable" evidence that he didn't get the Democratic National Committee emails from Russia, but from another source.

Does not rule out the possibility that they did come from Russia but were given to Wikileaks by an intermediary who was not a Russian. Assange has made similar statements in the past.

Back in March: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/04/politics/assange-wikileaks-hannity-intv/index.html


"Our source is not a state party. So the answer -- for our interactions -- is no," Assange told anchor Sean Hannity from his quarters at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he has lived under diplomatic protection since 2012.



"He believes he should be pardoned in the same way that Chelsea Manning was pardoned."

Manning wasn't pardoned- according to Assange. He had his sentence commuted. If Manning was actually pardoned, Assange had promised he would turn himself over to the United States. To get the exact same treatment, Assange would have to be tried and sent to US prison and then later have his sentence commuted.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/julian-assange-breaks-pledge-leave-ecuadorian-embassy-for-us-if-chelsea-manning-pardon-a7551821.html


Mr Assange said last September that he would surrender to US authorities if Ms Manning was pardoned by Barack Obama – something the former President effectively granted in his final days in office by commuting the sentence from 35 years to just over seven years, the majority of which Manning had already served.

acptulsa
08-19-2017, 11:51 AM
Does not rule out the possibility that they did come from Russia but were given to Wikileaks by an intermediary who was not a Russian. Assange has made similar statements in the past.

Back in March: http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/04/politics/assange-wikileaks-hannity-intv/index.html

Back in March. Whatever. Wikileaks has, since then, stated unequivocally that the information came not from surveillance by a foreign power, but was leaked by an insider within the DNC.

You can admit the information was leaked by a DNC insider. Or you can accuse Wikileaks officials of lying when they said a DNC insider leaked the information. But you can't say--at least not with a straight face--that the Russians leaked their surveillance recordings of the DNC to a DNC insider, who then passed them along to Wikileaks.

So you're the new Zippy trainee, eh? Well, you're not in the frying pan any more. Welcome to the fire. Don't worry that you're half-baked. We're here to finish the job.

Zippyjuan
08-19-2017, 11:53 AM
Back in March. Whatever. Wikileaks has, since then, stated unequivocally that the information came not from surveillance by a foreign power, but was leaked by an insider within the DNC.

You can admit the information was leaked by a DNC insider. Or you can accuse Wikileaks officials of lying when they said a DNC insider leaked the information. But you can't say--at least not with a straight face--that the Russians leaked their surveillance recordings of the DNC to a DNC insider, who then passed them along to Wikileaks.

Link to Assange claiming his source was a DNC insider?

acptulsa
08-19-2017, 11:54 AM
Link to Assange claiming his source was a DNC insider?

Who claimed Assange personally said that?

Zippyjuan
08-19-2017, 11:55 AM
Who claimed Assange personally said that?

What about a quote from Wikileaks officials making the claim?


Or you can accuse Wikileaks officials of lying when they said a DNC insider leaked the information.

acptulsa
08-19-2017, 12:04 PM
Well, truth be known, I don't know how official Murray's position in Wikileaks is. But, as Zippy I seemed to be a Brit, maybe you'll take the Daily Mail's word for it that he's credible to speak for the entity.


Craig Murray, former British ambassador to Uzbekistan and a close associate of Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, told Dailymail.com that he flew to Washington, D.C. for a clandestine hand-off with one of the email sources in September.
'Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,' said Murray in an interview with Dailymail.com on Tuesday. 'The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.'
His account contradicts directly the version of how thousands of Democratic emails were published before the election being advanced by U.S. intelligence.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4034038/Ex-British-ambassador-WikiLeaks-operative-claims-Russia-did-NOT-provide-Clinton-emails-handed-D-C-park-intermediary-disgusted-Democratic-insiders.html#ixzz4qE2VzVky

If not, there are dozens of other sources for this story for you to choose from. I know you know how to use a search engine...

Zippyjuan
08-19-2017, 12:15 PM
Daily Mail is a tabloid rag which publishes a lot of unreliable information. They like "click bait" stories.

Swordsmyth
08-19-2017, 12:16 PM
Daily Mail is a tabloid rag which publishes a lot of unreliable information.
Zippyjuan is a tabloid rag which publishes a lot of unreliable information.

Raginfridus
08-19-2017, 12:17 PM
At this point, I'm convinced that the best thing for the people of this planet is a world wide EMP. Shut off all electronic forms of communication. This is the only salvation for humans. At that point we'd all have to go outside and talk to our neighbors and realize that they're not bad people.Do patients need to die, planes fall from the sky, just to learn our neighbors aren't the Klopeks? I need Operation Mayhem to wait just a couple more years, so I can actually prep and get across the Mississippi.

Zippyjuan
08-19-2017, 12:21 PM
Zippyjuan is a tabloid rag which publishes a lot of unreliable information.

According to Wikileaks: https://www.facebook.com/wikileaks/photos/a.1009727849062327.1073741830.108734602494994/1411888948846213/?type=3&theater

"Julian Assange does not speak through third parties. Only statements issued directly by him or his lawyers can be considered authoritative. "

acptulsa
08-19-2017, 12:37 PM
Daily Mail is a tabloid rag which publishes a lot of unreliable information. They like "click bait" stories.

The Sun, the Wasington Examiner, the Washington Times, Newsweek and Rupert Murdoch all found that story credible enough to carry. And apparently the FBI lends it some credence too, as all manner of sources from the New York Times down have not only quit the Russia narrative cold turkey, but covered the FBI's renewed investigation into where that information came from.

amartin315
08-19-2017, 12:42 PM
The Sun, the Wasington Examiner, the Washington Times, Newsweek and Rupert Murdoch all found that story credible enough to carry. And apparently the FBI lends it some credence too, as all manner of sources from the New York Times down have not only quit the Russia narrative cold turkey, but covered the FBI's renewed investigation into where that information came from.

yes, but with proof can we make the russian sanctions go away?

Zippyjuan
08-19-2017, 12:43 PM
The Sun, the Wasington Examiner, the Washington Times, Newsweek and Rupert Murdoch all found that story credible enough to carry. And apparently the FBI lends it some credence too, as all manner of sources from the New York Times down have not only quit the Russia narrative cold turkey, but covered the FBI's renewed investigation into where that information came from.

Sun and Washington Examiner also click bait. Even the Daily Mail noted:


[Murray’s] links to Wikileaks are well known and while his account is likely to be seen as both unprovable and possibly biased, it is also the first intervention by WikiLeaks since reports surfaced that the CIA believed Russia hacked the Clinton emails to help hand the election to Donald Trump.

acptulsa
08-19-2017, 12:43 PM
yes, but with proof can we make the russian sanctions go away?

No. But a billion dollar moneybomb might rent enough K Street lobbyists--and give them enough 'grease'--to do the job...

goldenequity
08-26-2017, 12:32 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QogelY1rcS4