is it right for Julian Assange to try to influence the US Election with his email leaks? (Iran, ethical)

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Derek41

Still at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, has been there for years, and can't see the light of day.

Thank you, that's what I thought. So Ecuador allows him to hack into US gov't accounts? I suppose this is their way of getting back at the US for trying to derail the Raphael Correa Presidency.......

[UrbanCrossroads]

Look at all the Republicans clamoring to see what Assange will release next. If Trump is so qualified for the presidency and if the general election is his to win, then why would you care what Assange does next?

Look at all the ways Republicans have tried to malign Hillary. First it was the Benghazi crap, then it was the email server crap. But when those two things went nowhere, now Republicans are clinging to the whole Assange/Wikileaks nonsense, in their hope that Assange will release something that will show that Hillary should be incarcerated. Absolutely pathetic.

[Ralph_Kirk]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Thank you, that's what I thought. So Ecuador allows him to hack into US gov't accounts? I suppose this is their way of getting back at the US for trying to derail the Raphael Correa Presidency.......

He's not doing his own hacking. Hackers are sending him information for dissemination.

[beerbeer]

Letting people know how dangerous and corrupt Hillary Clinton can be is a public service. You may not like Assange but you won't be able to shut him up.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by Ralph_Kirk

He's not doing his own hacking. Hackers are sending him information for dissemination.

Thanks for bringing me up to speed. This is one issue I never followed closely. So what this is doing, is encouraging hackers. Bad idea. I think that's the larger issue here.

[lunetunelover]

Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth

Thanks for bringing me up to speed. This is one issue I never followed closely. So what this is doing, is encouraging hackers. Bad idea. I think that's the larger issue here.

Actually, I think it could be a good idea. If our security protocols and systems are so easily hacked, we need stronger systems.


Personally, I think Hillary's private server may have left our systems vulnerable.

[Ruth4Truth]

Originally Posted by beerbeer

Letting people know how dangerous and corrupt Hillary Clinton can be is a public service. You may not like Assange but you won't be able to shut him up.

We have no choice but to vote for Dangerous 1 or Dangerous 2; they're both dangerous in their own way.

I still think O'Malley would have been a far better candidate, but The Bern and Hill already had assumed they would be the front-runners, even in the first debate. They were already speaking in campaign slogans, rather than outlining their plans, like O'Malley was.

I really don't understand anymore the way the electoral process works. It seems clear at this point that the most colorful candidates win the nominations, not the best qualified ones. It's about charisma, not much more.

[ColoGuy]

Our media is supposed to cover important news about the candidates and the elections. Most of the MSM is a DNC cheerleader/lapdog.

Never thought I would see the day that the most important news may be delivered by Snowden, Assange, and RT. My FB community generally concurs that our world is now upside down.

Why is the FBI investigating the source of the leak rather than the findings? FBI investigating the NSA could be fun.


The military/NSA and law enforcement/FBI do not generally like Hillary. She earned that.

[BLAZER PROPHET]

I haven't read the comments but I have concerns about leaking stolen information.


I mean, granted it proves people are lying and other unseemly things, but still it was illegally obtained. It's just not cricket.

[Sherifftruman]

He's dumber than I thought if he is trying to release anti Clinton stuff to get Trump elected as I can't see that being very good for him long term.