Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When he was exposing conservative politicians he was labeled a hero. He was even defended when allegations of sexual misconduct were leveled at him. Now that he is exposing a leftist establishment politician he is suddenly a villain. The thing is, he'd be happy to expose Trump as well but there's not much to expose because he hasn't been in the game - the political game - for that long. Plus the mainstream media is doing it's darndest to expose everything they can find out about him already, so there's no need for any sort of Wikileak on him. Not to mention, even in a political climate full of corruption she stands out for her staggering levels of corruption. There's a lot to expose. She's everything that is wrong with modern politics, personified.
"Assange said the leaks will be timed during Clinton’s run up until the November presidential election, adding that the recent leaks are “having so much political impact in the United States.”
you could say it is just a bunch of hot air but last weeks leaks did indeed cause a small fissure in the Democrats and resulted in Wasserman Schultz stepping down. And this could just be the beginning
It's completely fair. Exposing the truth is always good, suppressing it always bad when it comes to democracy. People deserve to know who they're voting for and what they truly stand for. Clinton does not stand with fair and honest democracy. This is a fact, based on those links. If she did, she'd let the election run it's course and if the case would be so, gladly accept defeat from Bernie Sanders. Or she'd beat him honestly.
Now, if Assange is exclusively targeting Clinton, there is some gray area. I see no reason to think of him as being a Trump supporter though, so it's not as if he's just trying to win an election for his candidate. He just truly believes that Hillary is awful, and she kind of is. Is she the lesser of two evils? Certainly from most points of view, though not all. So while I'd love him to dump all over Trump, there's simply less use for that.
It's completely fair. Exposing the truth is always good, suppressing it always bad when it comes to democracy. People deserve to know who they're voting for and what they truly stand for. Clinton does not stand with fair and honest democracy. This is a fact, based on those links. If she did, she'd let the election run it's course and if the case would be so, gladly accept defeat from Bernie Sanders. Or she'd beat him honestly.
Now, if Assange is exclusively targeting Clinton, there is some gray area. I see no reason to think of him as being a Trump supporter though, so it's not as if he's just trying to win an election for his candidate. He just truly believes that Hillary is awful, and she kind of is. Is she the lesser of two evils? Certainly from most points of view, though not all. So while I'd love him to dump all over Trump, there's simply less use for that.
As he's said in an interview (paraphrase) "Trump does a good enough job of dumping on himself, no need for me to do it".
Basically Trump talks so much I highly doubt there's much to find (that's not already public record) that has anything to do with the job at hand.
If he's going on Fox News, he's talking to the Fox News audience, average age of about 90. So he's totally jumped the shark at this point. No one's paying attention to him.
he's been on MSNBC and CNN as well. Also Fox News gets much higher ratings than any other news channel so him appearing on it opens him up to the widest audience.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.