Current Events > New Wikileaks emails show CNN, NBC, and WP worked with DNC to influence election

(+) Yeah! (+)

I don't see how that discredits the contents of the leaks, especially when those involved fully acknowledge them.

HogRiderreturns posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Doom_Art posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Sure he is taking it personal with the democrats

Which given his obvious bias, and personal control over the organization, along with his odd connections to Russia, make any information from him suspect

What has been posted that is fake?

Not posting things on Trump getting a golden shower

How is that fake?

They didn't post such thing, so that means Wikileak has zero credibility.
---

Doom Art working hard to assassinate the source.

"But...but...Russians!"
---

Tropicalwood posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Doom_Art posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Sure he is taking it personal with the democrats

Which given his obvious bias, and personal control over the organization, along with his odd connections to Russia, make any information from him suspect

What has been posted that is fake?

Not posting things on Trump getting a golden shower

How is that fake?

They didn't post such thing, so that means Wikileak has zero credibility.

When was it confirmed they were withholding documents on that?

Who cares Hillary is not the President.
---

MemeDaddy posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Doom_Art posted...

HogRiderreturns posted...

Sure he is taking it personal with the democrats

Which given his obvious bias, and personal control over the organization, along with his odd connections to Russia, make any information from him suspect

What has been posted that is fake?

Not posting things on Trump getting a golden shower

How is that fake?

They didn't post such thing, so that means Wikileak has zero credibility.

When was it confirmed they were withholding documents on that?

Doesn't matter if they were or weren't. Any of that information would be leaked to the press anyways, Doom_Fart doesn't care if Wikileaks had posted passwords to DNC servers and he could look at the emails himself, it doesn't matter to a person like him.
---

MemeDaddy posted...

When was it confirmed they were withholding documents on that?

Well I mean we know they have documents on the RNC but refuse to release them for... some reason?

Same goes for Russia. Assange used to run his mouth about how he had dirt on Putin and Russia. Then the FSB made a very public threat, some staffing changes occurred at WL and now Assange says he won't release that info because "Russia has intelligent journalists who can expose injustice without me" or some dumb crap like that.
---

cjsdowg posted...

Who cares Hillary is not the President.

"Who cares, the DNC is not still one of the two major political parties."

Oh wait...

---

Doom_Art posted...

Well I mean we know they have documents on the RNC but refuse to release them

[citation needed]

And doom art is still damage controlling

Jfc

Has anyone posted this on 261 yet? Id love to see the hardcore libs there try to spin this
---

No shit, the MSM tried hard for Killary
---

Not like we didn't know his already. The whole Donna Brazile fiasco should have been proof enough of that for everyone.

It also really bothers me how so many of the left view wikileaks as not credible when it's been pretty obvious from the reactions to their leaks that the info contained within has been legit. They may be biased in the targets they choose but they don't make up shit. I mean, when even CNN didn't acknowledge the leaks as fake and instead tried to scare people away from viewing them, that should have told you something right then.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-beYBLrkNAg
---

Doom_Art posted...

MemeDaddy posted...

When was it confirmed they were withholding documents on that?

Well I mean we know they have documents on the RNC but refuse to release them for... some reason?

Same goes for Russia. Assange used to run his mouth about how he had dirt on Putin and Russia. Then the FSB made a very public threat, some staffing changes occurred at WL and now Assange says he won't release that info because "Russia has intelligent journalists who can expose injustice without me" or some dumb crap like that.

That's a pretty huge assumption to make, especially considering Wikileaks is a publishing entity, not a group of hackers. Wikileaks has also published a fuck ton of Russian-Syrian emails. And by a fuck ton, I mean one of the largest leaks in history.

You don't sound well informed on the topic whatsoever.

He's always assassinating the source, he was bitching and moaning about Wikileaks releasing names of Saudis and now he's bitching and moaning about Wikileaks not releasing shit.
---

Things must be getting really desperate for Trump if the Wikileaks machine is getting spooled up again
---

Wikileaks hasn't posted any false information to date, but it's also important to keep in mind that they became a de facto Russian propaganda mouthpiece in 2016. It's not really journalism when you're being fed information that's been selectively sorted to support a particular political cause.

I also doubt Wikileaks' integrity when it comes to the timing of its publications. To be clear: there's no question that the info dumps are timed to do maximum damage to Russia's opponents. The only unknown is exactly how much Wikileaks manipulates the timing, versus how much it's controlled by their sources.

In any case... let's not forget the big, colluding elephant in the room. There's time to discuss both topics, but when it comes to finite FBI and DOJ resources, the only election scandal that matters is Trump team's collusion with Russia.
---

ManBeast462 posted...

No shit, the MSM tried hard for Killary

Ironically it's probably because the MSM made it look like such a slam dunk in her favor that nobody showed up to vote lol.
---

"Bbbbut Russia!"
---

FaultyGourry posted...

It also really bothers me how so many of the left view wikileaks as not credible when it's been pretty obvious from the reactions to their leaks that the info contained within has been legit. They may be biased in the targets they choose but they don't make up shit. I mean, when even CNN didn't acknowledge the leaks as fake and instead tried to scare people away from viewing them, that should have told you something right then.

To be fair, the real issue isn't that Wikileaks doesn't release facts. It's how they decide to release things and when that's the problem. Withholding information to release them at a later time is a good way to spin a message or take people's mind off of something else. Which basically makes them a pseudo propaganda tool for the current administration given how all their releases have always been to aid Trump.

I wouldn't really consider this leak something we should be focusing on at this moment when the current administration in power is under fire for collusion. Which you know it's bad when Fox's defense is "collusion isn't a crime".
---

Polycosm posted...

It's not really journalism when you're being fed information that's been selectively sorted to support a particular political cause.

Well yeah, that's kind of the whole point of this topic.

Both administrations sucks. Both are ripe with corruption and shit tier people. Just because trump is under fire too rn doesnt mean you just sweep shit like this under the rug. Newsstations need to be held accountable and cnn getting away with blatant corruption and collusion should never happen
---

i doubt anyone who makes the selective material publishing complaint has actually gone through the databases of emails wikileaks has published to see just how many emails contain absolutely nothing of importance
---

Someone please post this on 261.

Im at work and i need the laugh. Im on mobile so its a pain in the ass
---

Polycosm posted...

Wikileaks hasn't posted any false information to date, but it's also important to keep in mind that they became a de facto Russian propaganda mouthpiece in 2016. It's not really journalism when you're being fed information that's been selectively sorted to support a particular political cause.

I also doubt Wikileaks' integrity when it comes to the timing of its publications. To be clear: there's no question that the info dumps are timed to do maximum damage to Russia's opponents. The only unknown is exactly how much Wikileaks manipulates the timing, versus how much it's controlled by their sources.

In any case... let's not forget the big, colluding elephant in the room. There's time to discuss both topics, but when it comes to finite FBI and DOJ resources, the only election scandal that matters is Trump team's collusion with Russia.

Does that excuse the people in the leaks from any responsibility?

Tmaster148 posted...

To be fair, the real issue isn't that Wikileaks doesn't release facts. It's how they decide to release things and when that's the problem. Withholding information to release them at a later time is a good way to spin a message or take people's mind off of something else. Which basically makes them a pseudo propaganda tool for the current administration given how all their releases have always been to aid Trump.

I get that and I understand the reasoning behind disliking wikleaks. They've been heavily biased for awhile now and that big ass leak dump they pulled, what, 3 days before the election shows their cards easy, but that shouldn't undermine the credibility of their info. If something is legit, it should be taken as legit, not scoffed at as not credible because a person doesn't like how the source operates.

Tmaster148 posted...

I wouldn't really consider this leak something we should be focusing on at this moment when the current administration in power is under fire for collusion. Which you know it's bad when Fox's defense is "collusion isn't a crime".

I really have to disagree with this. People can focus on more than one issue a time. Sweeping something under the rug to deal with later is a good way for that issue to be forgotten and nothing done about it.
---

Another loss for the liberal scum. I love it!
---

Yeah, we know this for a fact.

Doesn't make the Russia connection fake, though.

Nice try.
---

Doom_Art posted...

i mean other people touched on what I was gonna say


selectively editing/publishing specific things in certain orders and at certain times, and their weird relationship with the Trump admin/Russia makes their bias a bit hard to ignore and makes what they say rather suspect.

Are you suggesting that the emails aren't true because there might be other emails that disparage other people?

How does that brain inside that little head of yours work?
---

_Near_ posted...

Yeah, we know this for a fact.

Doesn't make the Russia connection fake, though.

Nice try.

No, but the lack of any evidence that the Russia conspiracy is true despite 10 months of digging by the MSM suggests it's fake.

Meanwhile, we have evidence right here that the MSM is bought and paid for by the Democrats.
---

We're still in the VERY early stages of the investigation. Mueller is probably the one who knows the most about it right now and he would never comment on an ongoing investigation. It took 2 years of investigation for Nixon to get impeached. Claiming that the investigation has nothing at this juncture is stupid.

We know for a FACT that the administration is lying about Russia. If you think that they're not trying to hide anything, then sorry - you're just naive.
---

_Near_ posted...

We're still in the VERY early stages of the investigation. Mueller is probably the one who knows the most about it right now and he would never comment on an ongoing investigation. It took 2 years of investigation for Nixon to get impeached. Claiming that the investigation has nothing at this juncture is stupid.

The existence of an investigation is not proof that evidence exists.

But just look at how pitifully easy it was for Wikileaks to dig up proof of the DNC's collusion with media sources that claim to be fair and balanced. Look at how willing they are to lie to your face despite being guilty of the very same thing they accuse Trump of with no evidence to show they're right.

Doesn't it make you kinda mad that you've been lied to this whole time? Does it make you doubt the Russia conspiracy at all when the only people who have been pushing that narrative are colluders themselves?
---

Lol, who's been lied to? Bernie supporters have known that the DNC were in Clinton's pocket since the beginning. Just because wikileaks leaks stuff about the DNC and not Trump doesn't mean that there isn't stuff to leak. They're not a paragon of truth and neutrality.

And no one said investigations are indication of proof. The lying is. Why did they lie if they have nothing to hide? You'll never answer that, would you?
---

_Near_ posted...

Bernie supporters have known that the DNC were in Clinton's pocket since the beginning

and yet everytime we pointed this out

oh forget it.
---

_Near_ posted...

Lol, who's been lied to? Bernie supporters have known that the DNC were in Clinton's pocket since the beginning. Just because wikileaks leaks stuff about the DNC and not Trump doesn't mean that there isn't stuff to leak. They're not a paragon of truth and neutrality.

Wtf? This isn't about the DNC colluding with Hillary (which itself is shameful and should have been covered much more than it was), this is about Hillary and the DNC colluding with the mainstream media

Did you even look at the article..?
---

What serious Bernie supporter was defending the DNC in the primaries? Where the fuck were you? On CE talking to trolls?
---

Mal_Fet posted...

The existence of an investigation is not proof that evidence exists.

Didn't Trump say you should not elected someone under FBI investigation.
---

_Near_ posted...

What serious Bernie supporter was defending the DNC in the primaries? Where the fuck were you? On CE talking to trolls?

Mal_Fet posted...

this is about Hillary and the DNC colluding with the mainstream media

Did you even look at the article..?

---

cjsdowg posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

The existence of an investigation is not proof that evidence exists.

Didn't Trump say you should not elected someone under FBI investigation.

He wasn't under investigation when he was elected.
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Wtf? This isn't about the DNC colluding with Hillary (which itself is shameful and should have been covered much more than it was), this is about Hillary and the DNC colluding with the mainstream media

Did you even look at the article..?

Clinton and MSM are pretty much the same. We know about feeding questions to the debates a long time ago.
---

_Near_ posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

Wtf? This isn't about the DNC colluding with Hillary (which itself is shameful and should have been covered much more than it was), this is about Hillary and the DNC colluding with the mainstream media

Did you even look at the article..?

Clinton and MSM are pretty much the same. We know about feeding questions to the debates a long time ago.

Not to this degree, we didn't know.

Don't you find it significantly more troubling that the people who are supposed to be giving us the news are propping up their own politicians than Russia making fake news stories on Facebook that no one actually paid attention to and didn't sway the election at all?

http://web.stanford.edu/~gentzkow/research/fakenews.pdf
---

Oh well cased closed, Trump is now vindicated and we need to shut down these traitorous fake news medias and make some arrests. God this country is garbage,Dems and Reps have completely destroyed America. I don't want to live here anymore
---

but theres no proof of any wrongdoing from hillary, every post itt is modable for posting false facts as truth
---

Mal_Fet posted...

Don't you find it significantly more troubling that the people who are supposed to be giving us the news are propping up their own politicians than Russia making fake news stories on Facebook that no one actually paid attention to and didn't sway the election at all?

I find all of it troubling. I'm just not naive enough to think that just because MSM, DNC, and Clinton have lied and cheated that Trump's administration is blameless. Because they have already lied (a national security advisor was fucking fired for this in record time), and Trump Jr. is highly implicated.

And yeah, with the emails that wikileaks released during this campaign, this doesn't come as a surprise at all. Everyone with half a brain who read the previous media/clinton/dnc collusion leaks could surmise that it was large scale. These e-mails show that this is the MO - they're talking about this casually because that's how work is done. This isn't the first time they've done this or the last.

Same reasoning is applied to Trump Jr's emails. They literally say that this is just "part" of the russian government's support for Trump. Trump Jr didn't debate this and was excited at the proposition. This easily means that this wasn't the first time russian government-connected sources have contacted him, and that there's more to it. This isn't the first time they've done this or the last.

It just seems ridiculous that you decide to believe one obvious liar just because you're mad people believe the other.
---

A few questions

1) How does "collusion" with the media warrant any kind of criminal investigation? It's pretty obvious that there is biased journalism and news stories are constantly twisted to fit every agenda.

2) How come this suddenly absolves ol' Orangeface of any wrongdoing when these leaks have nothing to do with the shitpile he's been rolling in for a few weeks now.

3) How come leaks are okay and automatically 100% true when it's against the DNC/Shillary, but when there are leaks against Trump it's inexcusable, needs to stop, and is 100% "fake news?"

4) What does the inside of your colon smell like, Mal_Fet, because your head's pretty far up there.
---

The media is supposed to be non-partisan, but they show a clear bias on what they choose to report.
---

Tropicalwood posted...

The media is supposed to be non-partisan

Where in the constitution does it say that?
---

ZMythos posted...

Tropicalwood posted...

The media is supposed to be non-partisan

Where in the constitution does it say that?

They're a propaganda machine.

Also, why are you dragging the constitution into this as if CNN is some branch of the federal government.
---

I read the first page of this topic.

I will just say, if a source is posting nothing but accurate information, it doesn't matter if they're withholding information to protect one side. Because everyone already knows the bullshit that the people on the right do. It's like a daily routine for many to shit on the right. What this source does is show you that the other side that is being protected by the mainstream media does just as much shady shit.

Like ok, they have a bias. Which news source actually doesn't? Very very few. But we have a source here that doesn't post false info. People are only getting pissed because they only post that shit against their side, so apparently they can't take it seriously? That's putting your head in the fucking sand.
---

MemeDaddy posted...

Polycosm posted...

Wikileaks hasn't posted any false information to date, but it's also important to keep in mind that they became a de facto Russian propaganda mouthpiece in 2016. It's not really journalism when you're being fed information that's been selectively sorted to support a particular political cause.

I also doubt Wikileaks' integrity when it comes to the timing of its publications. To be clear: there's no question that the info dumps are timed to do maximum damage to Russia's opponents. The only unknown is exactly how much Wikileaks manipulates the timing, versus how much it's controlled by their sources.

In any case... let's not forget the big, colluding elephant in the room. There's time to discuss both topics, but when it comes to finite FBI and DOJ resources, the only election scandal that matters is Trump team's collusion with Russia.

Does that excuse the people in the leaks from any responsibility?

No, absolutely not. I complained about the DNC nonstop during the 2016 primaries. The DNC was eventually forced to clean house, and Clinton herself currently holds no office. Debbie Wasserman Schultz still holds public office in Florida and hasn't been held accountable to my satisfaction, but there's nothing I can do about that.

There's still cleanup to do and we need to make sure that this doesn't happen again, but... at the same time, there are much, much more pressing issues with our elections. While the DNC has been punished to some degree, disturbingly little is being done to prevent Russia from repeating their attack on our democracy.

Both lines of thought occupy my mind simultaneously, but given Russia's strategy of providing distractions, it's important that we always consider what our priorities should be. That's why I generally don't talk about the DNC's problems without also mentioning Russia's interference in the same breath. The latter is the bigger threat moving forward, and we can't allow ourselves to lose sight of it.
---