WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange confirmed Wednesday that the CEO of a data analytics firm President Trump's campaign hired during last year's election offered to help him handle 33,000 emails he claimed to have recovered from former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Cambridge Analytica leader Alexander Nix told a third party he had contacted Assange about partnering to work on the emails, though the specific task at hand was not shared.

Assange did not accept Nix's offer to help, sources familiar with a congressional probe into the Trump campaign's possible relationship with Russia said Wednesday. Assange tweeted a statement mid-Wednesday local time.

"I can confirm an approach by Cambridge Analytica [prior to November last year] and can confirm that it was rejected by WikiLeaks," he said.

However, it's still unconfirmed since the Clinton emails were never released that Wikileaks has the thousands of pages of electronic messages.

A federal team and the House and Senate intelligence committees have so far been unsuccessful at finding any evidence of collusion between Trump's associates and Russia before, during, or after the 2016 presidential election.

Go here to read the rest:
Julian Assange confirms data firm Trump hired during campaign ...

A data-mining firm that worked for Donald Trumps election campaign made an approach to WikiLeaks, founder Julian Assange said on Wednesday.

The statement followed a report in the Daily Beast that Cambridge Analytica chief executive Alexander Nix made contact with Assange about the possible release of 33,000 of former secretary of state Hillary Clintons missing emails.

I can confirm an approach by Cambridge Analytica [prior to November last year] and can confirm that it was rejected by WikiLeaks, Assange tweeted. He did not elaborate on the content of the request.

The Daily Beast report said: Nix, who heads Cambridge Analytica, told a third party that he reached out to Assange about his firm somehow helping the WikiLeaks founder release Clintons missing emails, according to two sources familiar with a Congressional investigation into interactions between Trump associates and the Kremlin.

Those sources also relayed that, according to Nixs email, Assange told the Cambridge Analytica CEO that he didnt want his help, and preferred to do the work on his own. If the claims Nix made in that email are true, this would be the closest known connection between Trumps campaign and Assange.

Another report by CNN, citing two unnamed sources, said Nix wrote to several people including Trump mega-donor Rebekah Mercer, explaining that he had emailed Assange seeking access to the Clinton emails to turn them into a searchable database for the campaign or a pro-Trump political action committee.

Mercer and her father Robert, a hedge fund billionaire, are major investors in Cambridge Analytica. Steve Bannon was a vice-president of the company he reportedly had holdings valued at between $1m and $5m before joining the Trump campaign and becoming the White House chief strategist, a post he left in August.

Cambridge Analyticas website claims it holds up to 5,000 data points on more than 230 million American voters. It promises to help clients gain the advantage over your opponents by adding our blend of big data analytics and behavioral psychology to your campaign arsenal. It is believed to analyse social media, such as Facebook likes, to build a psychographic picture of target voters.

The company was hired as part of the Trump campaigns data operation, led by Brad Parscale and overseen by Trumps son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Between 29 July and 12 December the Trump campaign paid Cambridge Analytica $5.9m, according to the Federal Election Commission. Soon after the election Forbes magazine reported that Kushner turned to it to map voter universes and identify which parts of the Trump platform mattered most.

But on Wednesday afternoon Michael Glassner, executive director of the Trump campaign, released a statement that did not mention Cambridge Analytica or WikiLeaks by name. We as a campaign made the choice to rely on the voter data of the Republican National Committee to help elect President Donald J Trump, he said. Any claims that voter data from any other source played a key role in the victory are false.

The Trump campaign is under federal investigation over alleged collusion with Russia. Parscale was interviewed on Tuesday by the House intelligence committee and, according to CNN, many of the committees questions were about the campaigns work with Cambridge Analytica, which Parscale downplayed.

The committee has also requested information from Cambridge Analytica about its work for the Trump campaign. The company has said it is complying but is not under investigation and there is no suggestion of wrongdoing.

The 33,000 emails deleted from Clintons personal email server have never come to light and there is no evidence that WikiLeaks possessed them. In July last year Trump told a press conference: Russia, if youre listening, I hope youre able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.

He made Clintons emails a central focus of the campaign in which his supporters chanted, Lock her up! and regularly lavished praise on WikiLeaks. In October he declared: I love WikiLeaks!

WikiLeaks published emails hacked from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta just hours after the release of a potentially campaign-ending Access Hollywood tape in which Trump could be heard boasting about groping women. Assange has denied receiving help from Russian hackers.

During the election campaign, the veteran political operative Roger Stone, who is close to Trump, told Boston Herald Radio that he expected Julian Assange and the Wikileaks people to drop a payload of new documents on a weekly basis fairly soon. And that of course will answer the question of exactly what was erased on that email server.

Read more from the original source:
Julian Assange confirms Cambridge Analytica sought ...

Julian Assange, the whistleblower once accused of rape, comparedthe men accused by sexual assault victims in the #MeToo campaign to black men beinglynched after being wrongly accused of raping white women.

Assange posted on Twitter asking how women posting with the #MeToo hashtag would have reacted back whenthe lynching of black men accused of sexual misconduct against white women was a common occurrence.

"All I can say is thank god the Twittermob wasnt around in the Old South: there would have been a hell of a lot more black men swinging from trees as tweeters said: I believe the woman. Hes definitely a rapist. #metoo," Assange tweeted.

Keep up with this story and more by subscribing now

Many people called out the founder of WikiLeaks for his tweet, with some reminding him that he was accused of rape and molestation in two incidents in 2010.

"Is that why youre hiding in a cupboard from being questioned on sex abuse allegations?" said Twitter user Art Steventon."You have zero agency on this subject."

Otherusers called the tweet a disgusting analogy, with some saying Assange wants rape victims to keep quiet.

The #MeToo campaign, started byTarana Burke, went viralon social media when actressAlyssa Milano posted a tweet urging women to come forward with their stories of sexual harassment. The post cameafter scores of women in Hollywood accused now-disgraced movie executiveHarvey Weinsteinof sexual harassment and rape.

Assange followedhis tweet with another poston Saturdaythat also didn't sit well with social media. He said he wanted to let women in on a "male secret": that men who call themselves feminists are "predatory sleaze bags."

The post was an apparent reference to Weinstein, who was known for contributing to causes that supported women's equality despite his long history of allegedly abusing them.

Assange linked to a story about a retired Swedish police chief whohad tried to end sexism in the police force but was also accused of sex trafficking and rape. Assange compared the chief to Weinstein.

Social media users began to poke fun at Assange for his male secret comment, with some arguing that Assange was trying to dissuade men from becoming feminists.

Assange has spent nearly seven years living in the embassy after the accusations of sexual harassment were aired. Assange tried to clear his name in 2016 when he claimed the sex with the woman accusing him of rape was "entirely innocent" and consensual.

After Swedish authorities dropped the rape charge, his lawyers said in May that he would stay at the embassy until it was clear whether or not the U.S. would extradite him for leaking classified military information.

Assange's lawyer Melinda Taylor previously told Newsweek that her client would remain in the embassy until "the ongoing national security prosecution in the United States" had ended.

WikiLeaks then released a statement in May on Assanges stay in the embassy.

UK refuses to confirm or deny whether it has already received a US extradition warrant for Julian Assange. Focus now moves to UK, the group said in a tweet.

View original post here:
Whistleblower Julian Assange Sounds Off on #MeToo Twitter ...

On 16 October, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation aired an interview with Hillary Clinton: one of many to promote her score-settling book about why she was not elected President of the United States.

Wading through the Clinton book,What Happened,is an unpleasant experience, like a stomach upset. Smears and tears. Threats and enemies. They (voters) were brainwashed and herded against her by the odious Donald Trump in cahoots with sinister Slavs sent from the great darkness known as Russia, assisted by an Australian nihilist, Julian Assange.

InTheNew York Times,there was a striking photograph of a female reporter consoling Clinton, having just interviewed her. The lost leader was, above all, absolutely a feminist. The thousands of womens lives this feminist destroyed while in government Libya, Syria, Honduras were of no interest.

InNew Yorkmagazine, Rebecca Traister wrote that Clinton was finally expressing some righteous anger. It was even hard for her to smile: so hard that the muscles in her face ache. Surely, she concluded, if we allowed womens resentments the same bearing we allow mens grudges, America would be forced to reckon with the fact that all these angry women might just have a point.

Drivel such as this, trivialising womens struggles, marks the media hagiographies of Hillary Clinton. Her political extremism and warmongering are of no consequence. Her problem, wrote Traister, was a damaging infatuation with the email story. The truth, in other words.

The leaked emails of Clintons campaign manager, John Podesta, revealed a direct connection between Clinton and the foundation and funding of organised jihadism in the Middle East and Islamic State (IS). The ultimate source of most Islamic terrorism, Saudi Arabia, was central to her career.

One email, in 2014, sent by Clinton to Podesta soon after she stepped down as US Secretary of State, discloses that Islamic State is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Clinton accepted huge donations from both governments for the Clinton Foundation.

As Secretary of State, she approved the worlds biggest ever arms sale to her benefactors in Saudi Arabia, worth more than $80 billion. Thanks to her, US arms sales to the world for use in stricken countries like Yemen doubled.

This was revealed by WikiLeaks and published byTheNew York Times.No one doubts the emails are authentic. The subsequent campaign to smear WikiLeaks and its editor-in-chief, Julian Assange, as agents of Russia, has grown into a spectacular fantasy known as Russiagate. The plot is said to have been signed off by Vladimir Putin himself. There is not a shred of evidence.

The ABC Australia interview with Clinton is an outstanding example of smear and censorship by omission. I would say it is a model.

No one, the interviewer, Sarah Ferguson, says to Clinton, could fail to be moved by the pain on your face at that moment [of the inauguration of Trump] Do you remember how visceral it was for you?

Having established Clintons visceral suffering, Ferguson asks about Russias role.

CLINTON: I think Russia affected the perceptions and views of millions of voters, we now know. I think that their intention coming from the very top with Putin was to hurt me and to help Trump.

FERGUSON: How much of that was a personal vendetta by Vladimir Putin against you?

CLINTON: I mean he wants to destabilise democracy. He wants to undermine America, he wants to go after the Atlantic Alliance and we consider Australia kind of a an extension of that

The opposite is true. It is Western armies that are massing on Russias border for the first time since the Russian Revolution 100 years ago.

FERGUSON: How much damage did [Julian Assange] do personally to you?

CLINTON: Well, I had a lot of history with him because I was Secretary of State when ah WikiLeaks published a lot of very sensitive ah information from our State Department and our Defence Department.

What Clinton fails to say and her interviewer fails to remind her is that in 2010, WikiLeaks revealed that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had ordered asecret intelligence campaign targeted at the United Nations leadership, including the Secretary General, Ban Ki-moon and the permanent Security Council representatives from China, Russia, France and the UK.

A classified directive, signed by Clinton, was issued to US diplomats in July 2009, demanding forensic technical details about the communications systems used by top UN officials, including passwords and personal encryption keys used in private and commercial networks.

This was known as Cablegate. It was lawless spying.

CLINTON: He [Assange] is very clearly a tool of Russian intelligence. And ah, he has done their bidding.

Clinton offered no evidence to back up this serious accusation, nor did Ferguson challenge her.

CLINTON: You dont see damaging negative information coming out about the Kremlin on WikiLeaks. You didnt see any of that published.

This was false. WikiLeaks has published a massive number of documents on Russia more than 800,000, most of them critical, many of them used in books and as evidence in court cases.

CLINTON: So I think Assange has become a kind of nihilistic opportunist who does the bidding of a dictator.

FERGUSON: Lots of people, including in Australia, think that Assange is a martyr for free speech and freedom of information. How would you describe him? Well, youve just described him as a nihilist.

CLINTON: Yeah, well, and a tool. I mean hes a tool of Russian intelligence. And if hes such a, you know, martyr of free speech, why doesnt WikiLeaks ever publish anything coming out of Russia?

Again, Ferguson said nothing to challenge this or correct her.

CLINTON: There was a concerted operation between WikiLeaks and Russia and most likely people in the United States to weaponise that information, to make up stories to help Trump.

FERGUSON: Now, along with some of those outlandish stories, there was information that was revealed about the Clinton Foundation that at least in some of the voters minds seemed to associate you .

CLINTON: Yeah, but it was false!

FERGUSON: with the peddling of information

CLINTON: It was false! It was totally false! ..

FERGUSON: Do you understand how difficult it was for some voters to understand the amounts of money that the [Clinton] Foundation is raising, the confusion with the consultancy that was also raising money, getting gifts and travel and so on for Bill Clinton that even Chelsea had some issues with?

CLINTON: Well you know, Im sorry, Sarah, I mean I, I know the facts .

The ABC interviewer lauded Clinton as the icon of your generation. She asked her nothing about the enormous sums she creamed off from Wall Street, such as the $675,000 she received for speaking at Goldman Sachs, one of the banks at the centre of the 2008 crash. Clintons greed deeply upset the kind of voters she abused as deplorables.

Clearly looking for a cheap headline in the Australian press, Ferguson asked her if Trump was a clear and present danger to Australia and got her predictable response.

This high-profile journalist made no mention of Clintons own clear and present danger to the people of Iran whom she once threatened to obliterate totally, and the 40,000 Libyans who died in the attack on Libya in 2011 that Clinton orchestrated. Flushed with excitement, the Secretary of State rejoiced at the gruesome murder of the Libyan leader, Colonel Gaddafi.

Libya was Hillary Clintons war, Julian Assange said in a filmed interview with me last year. Barack Obama initially opposed it. Who was the person championing it? Hillary Clinton. Thats documented throughout her emails theres more than 1700 emails out of the 33,000 Hillary Clinton emails that weve published, just about Libya. Its not that Libya has cheap oil. She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state something that she would use in her run-up to the general election for President.

So in late 2011 there is an internal document called the LibyaTick Tockthat was produced for Hillary Clinton, and its the chronological description of how she was the central figure in the destruction of the Libyan state, which resulted in around 40,000 deaths within Libya; jihadists moved in, ISIS moved in, leading to the European refugee and migrant crisis.

Not only did you have people fleeing Libya, people fleeing Syria, the destabilisation of other African countries as a result of arms flows, but the Libyan state itself was no longer able to control the movement of people through it.

This not Clintons visceral pain in losing to Trump nor the rest of the self-serving scuttlebutt in her ABC interview was the story. Clinton shared responsibility for massively de-stabilising the Middle East, which led to the death, suffering and flight of thousands of women, men and children.

Ferguson raised not a word of it. Clinton repeatedly defamed Assange, who was neither defended nor offered a right of reply on his own countrys state broadcaster.

In a tweet from London,Assange cited the ABCs own Code of Practice, which states: Where allegations are made about a person or organisation, make reasonable efforts in the circumstances to provide a fair opportunity to respond.

Following the ABC broadcast, Fergusons executive producer, Sally Neighbour, re-tweeted the following: Assange is Putins bitch. We all know it!

The slander, since deleted, was even used as a link to the ABC interview captioned Assange is Putins (sic) b****. We all know it!

In the years I have known Julian Assange, I have watched a vituperative personal campaign try to stop him and WikiLeaks. It has been a frontal assault on whistleblowing, on free speech and free journalism, all of which are now under sustained attack from governments and corporate internet controllers.

The first serious attacks on Assange came from theGuardianwhich, like a spurned lover, turned on its besieged former source, having hugely profited from WikiLeaks disclosures. With not a penny going to Assange or WikiLeaks, aGuardianbook led to a lucrative Hollywood movie deal. Assange was portrayed as callous and a damaged personality.

It was as if a rampant jealousy could not accept that his remarkable achievements stood in marked contrast to that of his detractors in the mainstream media. It is like watching the guardians of the status quo, regardless of age, struggling to silence real dissent and prevent the emergence of the new and hopeful.

Today, Assange remains a political refugee from the war-making dark state of which Donald Trump is a caricature and Hillary Clinton the embodiment. His resilience and courage are astonishing. Unlike him, his tormentors are cowards.

More here:
Clinton, Assange and the War on Truth

CLAIM

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange said Bernie Sanders was threatened to drop out of the presidential race.SeeExample( s )

Collected via e-mail and Twitter, September 2016

On 29 August 2016, the unreliable web site USA Supreme published an item claiming that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told journalist John Pilger that Bernie Sanders won the Democratic presidential nomination but dropped out of the race after he was threatened.

That claim was aggregated to a number of questionable web sites and rocketed to the top of Facebooks trending topics list on 9 September 2016. However, all iterations of the claim traced back to the original USA Supreme article, which stated:

John Pilger made an interview with Assange and is planning to use this material for his next documentary about Wikileaks founder! We gonna report with every major info from this interview in the nex few days! You can read the first part of the interview in a link below!

Pilger: Julian, we cut you off earlier when you were talking about what you felt were the most significant emails that you have released. Is there any last one that youd like to mention? And also, do you have any thoughts on Bernie Sanders? I mean what is your opinion why Bernie Sanders drop out of the race?

Assange: Look, I think you know, we know how politics works in the United States. Whoever whatever political party gets into government is going to merge with the bureaucracy pretty damn fast. It will be in a position where it has some levers in its hand. And Bernie Sanders was independent candidate trying to get the nomination trough the Democratic Party and if you ask me he did get the nomination, but he was threatened to drop out!

Pilger: What do you mean by that will your next leak contain information about Bernie Sanders?

Assange: Of course were very interested in revealing the truth about any candidate and yes we have some material about Bernie Sanders that will be published!

Assange isnt focusing entirely on Clinton however, urging anyone with information on Bernie Sanders to come forward!

Although multiple articles had repeated this claim as of 9 September 2016, we found no other appearance of the alleged quote anywhere online other than USA Supreme as of 30 August 2016. Moreover, USA Supreme provided no information pertaining to the date of the interview, no link to the interview itself, nor an explanation of how they supposedly came into possession of information that would be headline news had it been credible.

Neither Pilger nor WikiLeaks made any reference on Twitter (through which Assange frequently communicates) to the bombshell claim. Pilger did mention Sanders by name on his official web site on 23 August 2016, but he made no reference to his presumably newsworthy interview with Assange:

In America, the problem for the thousands of followers of Bernie Sanders was the Democratic Party, not to mention their ultimate betrayal by their great white hope. In the US, home of the great civil rights and anti-war movements, it is Black Lives Matter and the likes of Codepink that lay the roots of a modern version.

Another massive red flag in the original item was that the words attributed to Pilger indeed stemmed from an interview with Assange conducted back late July 2016 (shortly after the DNC leaks controversy), but those words were spoken by Democracy Now!s Amy Goodman, not by Pilger:

Finally, Julian, we cut you off earlier when you were talking about what you felt were the most significant emails that you have released. Is there any last one that youd like to mention? And also, do you have any thoughts on Donald Trump? I mean, just before we went to air, a CNN poll came out that says Donald Trump is ahead by 5 percentage points of Hillary Clinton. Now, he did just come off of the Republican convention, but many called it the worst convention in history, so its not automatic that he should have had this percentage lead. Of course, though, you have the crisis, the disarray, the Democratic Party is in because of these emails that youve released.

What Assange actually said in response to that query in no way resembled a claim that Sanders had been threatened to drop out of the race:

Look, I think you know, we know how politics works in the United States. Whoever whatever political party gets into government is going to merge with the bureaucracy pretty damn fast. It will be in a position where it has some levers in its hand. And so, as a result, corporate lobbyists will move in to help control those levers. So it doesnt make much difference in the end. What does make a difference is political accountability, a general deterrence set to stop political organizations behaving in a corrupt manner. That can make a difference, because that changes the perception of what you can do or not do. And so, always well, almost always, you should choose the principled position, which is to set a disciplinary signal about acting in a corrupt way, and take a philosophical position, which is our institutions can only be as good as our understanding of our institutions.

The other top emails, well, as I said, I think this instruction by Luis Miranda, the head of communications, to go out and covertly spread anti-Bernie Sanders propaganda is a clear instruction combined with a chain of command. Its not simply expressing a sentiment. It is expressing an instruction within the DNC to subvert the Bernie Sanders campaign.

Then theres a lot of emails about the close relationship between the DNC and the media The Washington Post involved in a co-fundraising party, an off-list co-fundraising for the DNC, calling up MSNBC during the middle of a program and saying, Pull that segment now, Debbie Wasserman Schultz calling up the president of MSNBC in order to discipline Morning Joe, etc. Thats, you know, of course, something that weve all suspected happens, but this is concrete proof of it.

Interview questions and answers attributed to Pilger and Assange on 29 August 2016 by USA Supreme matched much of Goodmans 25 July 2016 interview with the WikiLeaks founder, and verbatim repetition of the very same queries and responses in a separate setting is highly implausible. Moveover, prior to starting the rumor that Julian Assange had proclaimed Bernie Sanders was threatened, USA Supreme similarly falsely attributed remarks made by Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren to Hawaii Representative Tulsi Gabbard.

Got a tip or a rumor? Contact us here.

Democracy Now!. Julian Assange: Choosing Between Trump or Clinton Is Like Picking Between Cholera or Gonorrhea. 25 July 2016.

johnpilger.com. Provoking Nuclear War by Media. 23 August 2016.

Read the original here:
Julian Assange Said Bernie Sanders Won Race, Was Threatened

The founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange, has posted a tweet thanking United States government officials and the financial institutions that refused services to Wikileaks for driving them to invest in bitcoin during 2010. Assanges tweet indicates that Wikileaks bitcoin holdings have seen gains of over 50,000%.

Also Read:Your Bitcoins Open to CIA and Criminals, Heed Wikileaks Warning

On the 14th of October, Julian Assange expressed his deepest thanks to the US government, Senator McCain and Senator Lieberman for pushing Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, AmEx, Moneybookers, et al, into erecting an illegal banking blockade against @Wikileaks starting in 2010. Assange stated that the financial embargo caused [Wikileaks] to invest in Bitcoin, which has generated the organization a more than 50000% return.

Wikileaks became the subject of financial blockage in 2010 after the organization released classified U.S diplomatic cables pertaining to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars in November of that year. As a consequence, Bank of America, VISA, MasterCard, PayPal and Western Union collectively refused to provide financial services to the organization. As a consequence, Wikileaks was forced to incorporate bitcoin into its financial operations, including accepting private donations in the form of bitcoin.

The prospect of Wikileaks adopting bitcoin during the infancy of cryptocurrency was met with mixed reactions by key figures within the bitcoin community. In response to a bitcointalk.org forum comment stating bring it on. Lets encourage Wikileaks to use bitcoins, the creator of bitcoin, Satoshi Nakamoto, requested that Wikileaks avoid adopting bitcoin, in what would come to be his second last post on the forum. On December 5, 2010, Satoshi wrote no, dont bring it on. The project needs to grow gradually so the software can be strengthened along the way. I make this appeal to Wikileaks not to try to use bitcoin. Bitcoin is a small beta community in its infancy. You would not stand to get more than pocket change, and the heat you would bring would likely destroy us at this stage. As a consequence of the controversy, Wikileaks did not accept bitcoin donations until June 2011.

During August 2012, it was reported that Wikileaks had received more than 1,100 bitcoin donations at that time equating to over $32,000 USD. With the price of bitcoin then sitting at approximately $10 USD, Wikileaks owned more than 3200 bitcoin in just over one year of accepting the cryptocurrency. In November 2016,Wikileaks surpassed the milestone of having received more than 4000 bitcoins in donations.

Last week, the price of a single bitcoin broke out above $5000 USD for the first time ever, before setting a new all-time high of $5920 USD on Bitfinex. The dramatic breakout follows several weeks of consolidation after a sudden retracement of almost 40%, which was triggered by the initiation of Chinas crackdown on cryptocurrency exchanges.

Do you think that Wikileaks adoption of bitcoin was ultimately beneficial to the bitcoin ecosystem in the long term? Or do you think that Wikileaks shouldnt have risked drawing the attention of regulators during bitcoins infancy? Share your thoughts in the comments section below!

Images courtesy of Shutterstock, WikiLeaks.org

Need to calculate your bitcoin holdings? Check our tools section.

Here is the original post:
Julian Assange Thanks U.S. Government for 50,000% Gains on ...

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange responded to Hillary Clintons claim that his organisation was a subsidiary of Russian intelligence by asserting that theres something wrong with the former presidential candidate.

Theres something wrong with Hillary Clinton, Assange tweeted.

There's something wrong with Hillary Clinton. It is not just her constant lying. It is not just that she throws off menacing glares and seethes thwarted entitlement. Watch closely. Something much darker rides along with it. A cold creepiness rarely seen. https://t.co/JNw2dkXgdu

Julian Assange (@JulianAssange) October 15, 2017

It is not just her constant lying. It is not just that she throws off menacing glares and seethes thwarted entitlement, he added.

The Wikileaks founder went further, tweeting, Watch closely. Something much darker rides along with it. A cold creepiness rarely seen.

As part of her global whinge tour, during an appearance on an Australian TV program, Hillary said Assange was a nihilistic opportunist who does the bidding of a dictator, while also claiming (with no evidence) that WikiLeaks is unfortunately now practically a fully owned subsidiary of Russian intelligence.

Responding to Hillarys charge that Wikileaks never publishes any information about Russia, Assange pointed out that the group actually did so just three weeks ago.

WikiLeaks has a pristine record for accuracy. HRC is not a credible person. The primary cause of her downfall was her own Machiavellian scheme to elevate Mr. Trump ("Pied Piper").

Our last Russian expose was three weeks ago. https://t.co/MGa1z99vVU https://t.co/He4vgLIKBW

Julian Assange (@JulianAssange) October 15, 2017

He also repeated the charge that Clinton is just attempting to distract from the fact that she initially conspired to elevate Trump because she thought she had an easier chance of defeating him.

Meanwhile, speculation is raging on whether Assange is about to reveal who gave him the DNC emails during the 2016 election campaign after the Wikileaks founder tweeted a series of numbers that resemble an encryption key.

4767 5774 6a7a 4d6c 6330 666b 314a 3453 0000 0907 84b4 f787 7616 86f7 a737 5707 5736

Julian Assange (@JulianAssange) October 15, 2017

Evidence emerges of a conspiracy to take down the DNC as far back as 2010, tweeted Assange, suggesting that more information is about to drop which would further disprove claims that Russia was responsible for the hack.

Evidence emerges of a conspiracy to take down the DNC as far back as 2010. https://t.co/gEvlQbSll7 pic.twitter.com/DzEYjBpubM

Julian Assange (@JulianAssange) October 16, 2017

SUBSCRIBE on YouTube:

Follow on Twitter: Follow @PrisonPlanet

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paul.j.watson.71

*********************

Paul Joseph Watson is the editor at large of Infowars.com and Prison Planet.com.

Here is the original post:
Julian Assange: "There's Something Wrong With Hillary Clinton ...

Julian Assange has launched a personal attack on Hillary Clinton, accusing her of lying and displaying a "cold creepiness" after the former US presidential candidate told the ABC the WikiLeaks founder is a "tool of Russian intelligence".

In an exclusive interview with Four Corners, Mrs Clinton alleged Mr Assange colluded with a Russian intelligence operation to disrupt the 2016 US election and damage her candidacy for president.

"Assange has become a kind of nihilistic opportunist who does the bidding of a dictator," she said.

"WikiLeaks is unfortunately now practically a fully owned subsidiary of Russian intelligence."

The Wikileaks founder, who has been living inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London since 2012, hit back this morning, tweeting that Mrs Clinton was "not a credible person".

Tweeting a link to the Four Corners interview, Mr Assange said there was "something wrong" with her.

"It is not just her constant lying. It is not just that she throws off menacing glares and seethes thwarted entitlement," he said. "Something much darker rides along with it. A cold creepiness rarely seen."

Speaking to Four Corners, Mrs Clinton said the operation against her was directed by Russian President Vladimir Putin.

"I think that their intention, coming from the very top with Putin, was to hurt me and to help [US President Donald] Trump," she said.

In January, the US intelligence community concluded Mr Putin ordered the influence campaign to discredit Mrs Clinton, and had a "clear preference" for her opponent.

"Our intelligence community and other observers of Russia and [Mr] Putin have said he held a grudge against me because, as secretary of state, I stood up against some of his actions, his authoritarianism," Mrs Clinton said.

"But it's much bigger than that. He wants to destabilise democracy, he wants to undermine America, he wants to go after the Atlantic alliance and we consider Australia an extension of that."

WikiLeaks received thousands of hacked emails from accounts connected to the Democratic campaign, allegedly stolen by Russian operatives.

The site released the emails over a four-month period in the lead-up to the election in 2016.

Mr Assange has denied the emails came from the Russian Government or any other "state parties".

Mrs Clinton contends the combination of WikiLeaks and the Russian operation contributed to her loss in a tight race.

"There was a concerted operation between WikiLeaks and Russia and most likely people in the United States to ... weaponise that information, to make up stories, outlandish, often terrible stories that had no basis in fact ... which were used to denigrate me, my campaign, people who supported me, and to help Trump," she said.

"I lost the electoral college by about 77,000, and what we're finding out is that there had to be some very sophisticated help provided to WikiLeaks ... to know how to target both their messages of suppression and their negative messages to affect voters."

Mrs Clinton pointed to examples of releases by WikiLeaks timed to do her maximum damage or distract from Mr Trump's campaign scandals.

At 4:00pm on October 7, The Washington Post published the 2005 Access Hollywood recording of Donald Trump's lewd comments about sexually harassing women.

"I don't even wait. And when you're a star they let you do it. You can do anything ... grab 'em by the pussy," Mr Trump said on the tape.

Less than an hour later, WikiLeaks published more than 2,000 emails from the personal account of Mrs Clinton's presidential campaign chair, John Podesta.

Mrs Clinton said the release of the emails blunted the impact of the tape.

"It was covered dramatically and wall-to-wall for about 48 hours," she said.

"WikiLeaks, which in the world in which we find ourselves promised hidden information, promised some kind of secret that might be of influence, was a very clever, diabolical response to the Hollywood Access tape.

"And I've no doubt in my mind that there was some communication if not coordination to drop those the first time in response to the Hollywood Access tape."

Mrs Clinton said that WikiLeaks' actions were motivated by Mr Assange's personal dislike of her.

"I had a lot of history with him because I was secretary of state when WikiLeaks published a lot of very sensitive information from our State Department and our Defence Department," she said.

But she said WikiLeaks had lost any claim to legitimacy.

"If he's such a martyr of free speech, why doesn't WikiLeaks ever publish anything coming out of Russia? You don't see damaging, negative information coming out about the Kremlin on WikiLeaks," she said.

In response, Mr Assange said WikiLeaks' "last Russian expos was three weeks ago" and said his organisation had a "pristine" reputation for accuracy.

Mrs Clinton warned cyber attacks had become the new normal.

"We've got to get used to the idea that cyber attacks are a really sophisticated and very difficult new form of theft," she said.

"It's [the US election] a precursor to what we will see continuing to happen in our politics or your politics or any democracy's politics, unless we figure out how to get ahead of it, and both to prevent it and mitigate it."

Watch the full Hillary Clinton interview on ABC iview.

Continued here:
Hillary Clinton says Julian Assange colluded with Russia to ...

By Simeon Tegel By Simeon Tegel October 14 at 5:30 AM

You might think that the worlds best-known fugitive from U.S. law would want to stay on good terms with the government that is shielding him. But that's not the way Julian Assange operates.

The WikiLeaks founder, who has been holed up in the Ecuadoran Embassy in London since 2012, is embroiled in a spat with the South American country's new president, Lenn Moreno, about Assanges vocal support for Catalonian separatists.

Moreno, who assumed office in January, has asked Assange to stay out of the constitutional crisis in Spain, prompting this riposte from the self-styled champion of freedom of information:

But Assange, who is wanted in Sweden for alleged sex offenses and potentially in the United States for publishing state secrets, might want to think twice before antagonizing Moreno. The new president seems bent on charting a different course than his mentor and predecessor, Rafael Correa,the brash leftist who first gave refuge to the Australian activist.

Moreno is openly seeking to replace Correas confrontational approach with dialogue," is encouraging corruption investigations of the former presidents inner circle and has largely stopped enforcing a law that once caused human rights groups to label Ecuadors media the least free other than Cubas in the Western Hemisphere. He has also described his predecessor as an authoritarian with an obsession with maintaining power and has just proposed a plebiscite on limits to presidential reelection that would effectively quash any bid by Correa to return to power in 2021.

Correa has responded with a string of characteristically outspoken attacks on Moreno, calling him a traitor, mediocre and a wolf in sheeps clothing.

All in all, Moreno appears to be trying to reposition Ecuador away from Venezuelas Bolivarian socialist axis while modeling himself on impeccably democratic Latin American leftists such as Chiles Michelle Bachelet and the former Uruguayan leader Jos Mujica.

That could spell trouble for Assange, whose continued residence in the Ecuadoran Embassy brings Moreno scant domestic political benefits while defining Ecuador as a geopolitical outlier antagonistic to the United States and other major Western powers.

[The government wants Julian Assange in jail. That could hurt the rest of us.]

Moreno has publicly stated that he will maintain Assanges asylum. But he has included a highly specific caveat: as long as we assume his life may be in danger. The president has also previously dismissed the WikiLeaks boss as a hacker.

Among those who think Moreno may already be wondering how to end the impasse over Assange is Csar Ricaurte, head of Fundamedios, a Quito-based nonprofit that advocates for press freedom and had numerous run-ins with Correa.

The situation of Assange in the embassy is unsustainable, Ricaurte said. He has converted himself into this great conspirator against the major democracies. I think the government is looking for a way out.

Ramiro Crespo, a financial analyst in Quito, the Ecuadoran capital, predicts that the president will bide his time, first focusing on winning his war with Correa.

Moreno has approval ratings touching 80 percent but no clear legislative majority, given thathis Alianza Pas (Country Alliance) party is split between Correa supporters and reformists. Correa loyalists also still control the courts and many other public institutions.

Moreno has to pick his battles and dismantle Correas machinery bit by bit, Crespo said. He is being cautious. Dealing with Assange is not the priority right now, but Moreno could decide to make a move once he feels stronger.

Exit strategies could include the president pressuring Assange to leave the embassy voluntarily. He might also seek an assurance from Washington, with whom he has a warming relationship, that capital punishment be ruled out in any potential trial.

Or he might simply suspend indefinitely the WikiLeaks activists Internet connection as Correa briefly did ahead of the 2016 U.S. presidential election citing his refusal to refrain from political activity.

[Ecuador cuts off Internet access for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange]

For now, Moreno has his hands full battling to break his predecessors grip on Ecuadors many branches of power. Assange, however, would be wise to prepare for a new reality in which he can no longer depend on a steadfast protector in Quito.

Read more:

Julian Assange was Ecuadors guest of honor. Until he wore out his welcome.

Here is the original post:
Julian Assange is squabbling with Ecuadors new president ...

AMYGOODMAN:I want to get your opinion on all of the news thats breaking right now. On Monday, Google said suspected Russian agents paid for tens of thousands of dollars worth of political advertisements last year aimed at swaying the 2016 presidential election. Managers at Microsoft said Monday they, too, were investigating whether Russian operatives paid for inappropriate pro-Trump ads on its Bing search engine and other platforms. Social media giant Facebook has said a Russian company placed thousands of ads on their network, at a cost of more than $100,000.CNNreports a number of ads specifically targeted Michigan and Wisconsin, two states crucial to Trumps victory in November. And Twitter reported last month that it discovered about 200 accounts linked to a Russian campaign to influence the election. This comes as the head of the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee said last week its reached the conclusion that Russia did interfere in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Republican Senator Richard Burr said his committee is still examining evidence to determine if theres any collusion between Moscow and the Trump campaign. Your response to all of this, WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange?

JULIANASSANGE:Well, I think theres a very good article recently published inThe Nationwhich goes through all of that, and its shown to be nearly all fiction. The parts that you can actually determine, where you can compare with internally contradictory statements or other things, shows that its nearly all fiction. Whether theres any truth to it, I dont know. We havent researched that.

Yeah, I would say that I think its very concerning to see this neo-McCarthyist hysteria, very, very dangerous in geopolitical terms. And, of course, its an attempt to, you know, to unite the Democratic Party.CIAstructures it together inand the media, in their assault against the Trump regime. But I think theres plenty of important things to criticize the Trump administration aboutfor example, their promises to help the working class, but, in fact, trying to push forward enormous tax cuts for the rich. And these are the things that should be concentrated on, not leaping into an insane bout of anti-Russian hysteria.

AMYGOODMAN:Julian Assange, I wanted to ask you about Roger Stone. In March of 2016, he posted on Facebook that he, quote, never denied that Assange and I had a mutual friend who told me Wikileaks had the goods onHRCthats Hillary Rodham Clintonand would begin disclosures in Oct. He did and they did. I didnt admit it- I announced it, unquote. In a series of tweets, which he later deleted, Roger Stone also attacked a woman who challenged him on Twitter, writing, quote, You stupid, stupid [B-word]never denied perfectly legal back channel to Assange who indeed had the goods on #CrookedHillary [sic]. I now wanted to talk about the latest, Roger Stone going to testify before the Senate Intelligence Committee and what came out of that. Your response to that?

JULIANASSANGE:Roger Stone has been trolling Democrats all his life, and hes doing exactly the same thing, in order to elevate his profile. Thats all. You can look at our statements at the time. He didnt say anything that I hadnt been saying in public at the time.

AMYGOODMAN:So, let me turn to Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff speaking at a hearing of the House

JULIANASSANGE:I would just say that the effectiveness of that trolling just shows you how mad the U.S. political culture has become. Is Roger Stone presented as a credible character in his statements? Is that a credible person? Do Democrats think that hes credible?

AMYGOODMAN:Well, I think the issue is his closeness to Trump. And whether or not you think Trump or Roger Stone is credible, the

JULIANASSANGE:Look, hesif he had something to worry about, why would he be deliberately playing it up, constantly? He doesnt have anything to worry about. Thats why hes playing it up.

AMYGOODMAN:What do you mean?

JULIANASSANGE:He doesnt have anything to worry about because there is no back channel. There was never a back channel. Ive said it at the time. Hes produced no evidence of it. We have complained about it. Hes simply trolling the absoluteyou know, they want to be trolled. They dont care. They dont care what the truth is at all. All they want is some little propaganda point that they can use to somehow satisfy their ridiculous fantasies about taking down Trump in relation to Russia. And if Roger Stone is going to help with that, they will give him a massive platform. And thats exactly what theyve done. And hes sold a lot more book as a result. I mean, you have to admire the chutzpah and, I suppose, the cleverness at which hes done it. Its, in some sense, admirable. What is not admirable, even though its really irritated us, is theI dont know, the slavish reaction of thoseyou know, he just throws a ball, like that, and these mindless mobs of people aligned to the Democrats and the Democratically aligned media in the United States run after it, and eventually over the cliff.

AMYGOODMAN:Well, let me turn to Democratic Congressman Adam Schiff speaking at a hearing of the House Intelligence Committee earlier this year.

REP.ADAMSCHIFF:On August 8th, Roger Stone, a longtime Trump political adviser and self-proclaimed political dirty trickster, boasts in a speech that he has communicated with Assange and that more documents would be coming, including an October surprise. In the middle of August, he also communicates with the Russian cutout Guccifer 2.0 and authors a Breitbart piece denying Guccifers links to Russian intelligence. Then, later in August, Stone does something truly remarkable, when he predicts that John Podestas personal emails will soon be published. Trust me, he says, it will soon be Podestas time in the barrel, hashtag #CrookedHillary. In the weeks that follow, Stone shows a remarkable prescience. I have total confidence that WikiLeaks and my hero, Julian Assange, will educate the American people soon, he says, hashtag, #LockHerUp. Payload coming, he predicts. And two days later, it does. WikiLeaks releases its first batch of Podesta emails. The release of John Podestas emails would then continue on a daily basis up until the election.

AMYGOODMAN:Your response, Julian Assange, to Adam Schiff of the House Intelligence Committee, ranking Democrat?

JULIANASSANGE:Adam Schiff is not a credible person. Hes justhes just lying in order to, you know, score political points. I had been saying all these things publicly, that we were going to publish information on Hillary Clinton before the election. Yeah.

AMYGOODMAN:So, this is

JULIANASSANGE:And the mediathe media got it into its stupid head, in fact, that we were going to publish it on October 4th, and that spread around everywhere. And so Roger Stones comments are responding to that kind of thing. But I dont want to feed intoI mean, I understand that theres a weird psychological phenomenon happening in the United States presently, but I dont want to feed into it, because I think its essentially inconsequential, in historical circumstances, unless it leads to a war with Russia. I mean, I dont know what the Trump campaigns connections are with Russia. I can only speak about us. Had no connections with us. We have no connections with Russia. So, I think itsand I think if the Russians have done anything else, as far as I can see, its not of a consequential nature.

AMYGOODMAN:But, Julian, this is thethis

JULIANASSANGE:So, maybe something will come out, but as far as I can determinenot that Im spending a lot of time on itas far as I can determine, theres nothing of any scale or significance.

AMYGOODMAN:But this is the anniversary of the email being released, the John Podesta emails. And I think its important because whats happening in these congressional investigations, Roger Stone is a key figure, whether you think hes credible or not, to have you respond, to make your point. I wanted to play Roger Stone

JULIANASSANGE:Yeah, he is brilliantly

AMYGOODMAN:Let me just play, and you respond to Roger Stone.

JULIANASSANGE:Yeah, he is

AMYGOODMAN:Let me just play two quick clips. August 8th, this is him speaking in Florida.

REPORTER:With regard to the October surprise, what would be your forecast on that, given what Julian Assange has intimated hes going to do?

ROGERSTONE:Well, it could be any number of things. I actually have communicated with Assange. I believe the next tranche of his documents pertain to the Clinton Foundation. But theres no telling what the October surprise may be.

AMYGOODMAN:Was he lying, Julian?

JULIANASSANGE:Well, as you said, he just said that they would pertain to the Clinton Foundation, which he washe was wrong. Hes just repeating what I said in the press.

AMYGOODMAN:So then, more recently, lets turn to Roger Stone speaking to reporters following his appearance in this closed hearing of the House Intelligence Committee. His interview with lawmakers was part of the investigation into Russias meddling in the 2016 election.

ROGERSTONE:I made the case that the accusation that I knew about John Podestas email hack in advance was false, that I knew about the content and source of the WikiLeaks disclosures regarding Hillary Clinton was false, and that my exchange with someone claiming to be Guccifer 2.0, when viewed through the context, content and timing, was benign and innocuous.

AMYGOODMAN:Stone also told reporters he declined to name his WikiLeaks intermediary during the interview.

ROGERSTONE:The reason I am not submitting that name is because the intermediary is a journalist, and our conversation was off the record. Im an opinion journalist. Hes a journalist. Im not going to burn somebody who I spoke to off the record. If he releases me, if he allows me to release it, I would be happy to give it to the committee. Im actually going to try to do that.

AMYGOODMAN:Now, of course, Roger Stone isnt a journalist, but what is your response to what hes saying right here, that there was an intermediary between you and him, who was a journalist?

JULIANASSANGE:That the United States political culture has gone mad. Roger Stone is trolling epically the Democratic political class in order to elevate his profile. And its sad to see thatDemocracy Now!is buying into it.

AMYGOODMAN:Presenting the news is not buying into it. Presenting the news is having you respond to what hes saying because you are the center of this, in this particular case, and its important to hear your voice.

JULIANASSANGE:Well, look, Amylook, Amy, Im getting annoyed. There is a historic event occurring this afternoon involving Catalonia, that could well change the nature of Europe, what forms of repression are acceptable within the Western world, and what moves populations can take in order to resist repression and come together to secure their self-determination. This has been the greatest Gandhian project that has occurred. Millions of Catalonians turning out to vote in the street are being beaten aggressively by Spanish security forces, being hacked by Spanish security forces, having their telephone exchange occupied, having their political leadership arrested, being threatened, as we saw today, with rebellion and put in prison for a minimum of 25 years.

That is going to spread throughout the Western world. The lessons of this are going to spread throughout the Western world toyes, to secessionist movements, but also to the states trying to repress them and to repress peoples struggles for self-determination, in general. The discipline with which the Catalan population have carried out their referendum is astounding. Astounding, that millions of people are going to the polls, being beaten by the police, and not one image of them fighting back. Not one image. Thats incredible discipline. And similarly in their marches and so on. And if the U.S. left is not absolutely obsessed with what is happening there and the redefinition that is occurring of the nature of the relationship between population and state, well, I mean, I have no time for you.

AMYGOODMAN:Well, we certainly had time for you today, Julian, and I think you made some really critical points, and theyre important. And I wanted to end on an issue that I also think that you care about, and thats the issue ofwell, Chelsea Manning is out of jail.

Read the original:
Exclusive: Julian Assange on Roger Stone and Trump Campaign ...