In the aftermath of the 2016 election, WikiLeaks enjoyed bragging about the impact of its repeated dumps of emails targeting Hillary Clintons campaign chairman and the Democratic National Committee:

President Obama called the medias publication of stories based on those dumps an obsession. Whatever you call it, yes, the U.S. media found the email releases fascinating and newsworthy.

At a Columbia Journalism Review conference today, Columbia Journalism School Professor Todd Gitlin read a question about this whole affair: Did you ever question if the WikiLeaks dump was, in fact, low-hanging fruit for the media to act as a tool for the Kremlin in its mission to disrupt the election?

Washington Post reporter Tom Hamburger replied, Yes.

Asked to elaborate, Hamburger continued, It was expressed in a way quite elegantly in the quote from Scott Shane . . . in which news organizations in publishing these documents, these emails, became de facto agents of the Kremlin. That is correct; the exact words from that New York Times story are as follows: Every major publication, including The Times, published multiple stories citing the D.N.C. and [Hillary Clintons campaign chairman John] Podesta emails posted by WikiLeaks, becoming a de facto instrument of Russian intelligence.

More Hamburger: If indeed there was a plan to undermine Hillary Clintons preexisting vulnerabilities because of all the email complaints, other assumptions that had been deeply ingrained from coverage earlier in 2016, WikiLeaks . . . reinforced that message, he said. And news organizations, including mine to the extent we looked at those WikiLeaks and reported on them, ended up reinforcing that theme. . . . We did so, I would say at The Washington Post, aware that we might be dealing with documents that in effect were being provided by a foreign power that didnt wish us well.

Same analysis applies to this blog. We published various stories based on the WikiLeaks dumps, including the revelations that Donna Brazile, a former CNN contributor and high-ranking official at the Democratic National Committee, had passed along questions for town hall and debate events to the Hillary Clinton campaign. We judged those emails and others worthy of coverage.

Read the original:
Was WikiLeaks low-hanging fruit for news organizations to act as Kremlin tools? - Washington Post (blog)

My latest Counter Propa article addresses how Democrats paved the way for Jeff Sessions to circumvent lying under oath. It also highlights the absurd groupthink regarding the uncertain narrative Russia hacked the election. Regarding Putins involvement with our election, New York Magazine states The CIA and FBI have high confidence in these findings, the NSA has moderate confidence.

Wait, theyre not certain?

Yet, millions of disheartened Democrats, unable to believe Trump could defeat Clinton without Russias help, accept wholeheartedly a story that even intelligence agencies (the same people informing us of Russian hacking) only have high confidence about; not certainty.

If you think WikiLeaks was part of a conspiracy uncovered by the FBI, then please do a word search for WikiLeaks or Julian Assange within the 13 page DHS and FBI Russian Hacking Report.

Funny how the same intelligence agencies claiming grandiose Russian hacking operations dont mention a word about WikiLeaks.

The disclaimer of this report is amusing and states The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) does not provide any warranties of any kind regarding any information contained within. DHS does not endorse any commercial product or service referenced in this advisory or otherwise.

No warranties of any kind, yet the same Democratic strategists angered that people know Bernie was cheated have championed the belief Russia absolutely hacked the DNC.

First, lets get a couple of things straight about Jeff Sessions.

I dont care if hes forced to resign. I did care about General Michael Flynn being forced to resign, because he did nothing wrong.

Furthermore, Democrats dont care about lying politicians. If they did value honesty, the DNC wouldnt have cheated Bernie Sanders for Clinton and the Clinton campaign wouldnt have elevated Trump.

Always remember, Clintons campaign elevated Donald Trump.

Sessions did lie to Congress, although perjury requires intent. Have fun, Democrats, you set the stage for all of this with Clintons lies under oath. Law Newz explains why simply lying under oath doesnt mean youll get charged with perjury:

Therefore, when people ask me to stop discussing Hillary Clinton, the legacy of her endless controversies are just as relevant today as they were during the election.

Sessions told the Senate he had no contact with the Russians but he could easily say (taking a page from Clintons dossier) he was referring to the Russians in unverified reports read by Al Franken. Heres the exact quote used by Democrats to prove perjury:

Every top Democrat, the same politicians who vehemently defended Clintons erroneous statements, see a clear-cut lie in the words of Jeff sessions. However, as Law Newz and Hillary Clintons entire career point out, Sessions has a million ways to deny overtly lying to Congress.

See? He never said he didnt meet a Russian official. He clarified that he didnt meet Russian officials to discuss issues of the campaign. His denial relates specifically to the unverified reports read by Senator Franken.

Sessions met with Ambassador Sergey Kislyak, but like Clinton, he could simply say he didnt know Franken meant even a Russian ambassador would constitute the Russians who have dirt on Trump.

Most importantly, this story isnt about perjury.

Its about Americas intelligence community unable to say with certainty that Russians hacked the DNC and the Clinton Campaign.

Sorry, high confidence does not mean certain or 100% confident.

Everything from Russia sanctions to a neo-McCarthy Democratic Party is fueled by high confidence Russia hacked the DNC.

If somebody told you they were highly confident youd live through the day, its doubtful youd have a very good day.

As for nefarious Russian hackers, the DNC has never allowed its computer servers to be analyzed by the FBI.

It doesnt matter how many intelligence agencies are highly confident in a theory, this level of confidence isnt certainty.

In addition, WikiLeaks categorically denies any involvement with Russian state actors.

As for The Washington Post, much of its reporting comes from anonymous leaks.

Targeting Sessions is also about finding a scapegoat for Hillary Clintons $1.2 billion loss to Trump.

Therefore, lets discuss one possible scenario that Democrats have in their minds at the moment. In the mind of Keith Olbermann, Jeff Sessions speaks to Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak about DNC emails that could help Trump in the election. These emails within the DNC lead to the following POLITICO article:

Jeff Sessions, in the daydreams of Al Franken, helps Russia destroy the DNC. Progressives are angry that Bernie Sanders was cheated and the knowledge WikiLeaks exposes hands the presidency to Trump.

Does this sound plausible?

Of course not, and if it does, make sure to give a big donation to Tom Perez and the DNC.

Then theres the viewpoint Jeff Sessions (or any Trump surrogate speaking to a dastardly Russian) must have been discussing Trumps business ties with Russian oligarchs. The only problem with this theory is that before the election, The New York Times published a piece titled Investigating Donald Trump, F.B.I. Sees No Clear Link to Russia:

Before the election, the FBI already investigated Trump and found nothing in terms of dangerous Russian connections. The New York Times writes none of the investigations so far have found any conclusive or direct link between Mr. Trump and the Russian government.

Yes, Jeff Sessions spoke to the Russian ambassador.

And theres no there, there. Remember that wonderful phrase?

I give my viewpoint on this latest controversy in the following H. A. Goodman YouTube segment.

Have fun trying to pin perjury charges on Sessions after Loretta Lynch stated she met with Bill Clinton to discuss golf, Brexit and grandchildren. She wasnt under oath, but its an example of another attorney general lying.

Sessions spoke to the Russian ambassador, yes. But do you think he was part of the DNC hack, or leak?

Do you think Sessions helped Russian hackers breach the impenetrable Podesta campaign?

Or is this about truth, honesty and the rule of law? Democrats now say its wrong to lie under oath. If so, remember when Hillary Clinton wasnt charged under the Espionage Act because of intent?

We could have had President Bernie Sanders had Comey found intent. Sadly, Democrats didnt listen in 2015 when I explained Why Sanders defeats Trump, but Trump defeats Clinton. I wrote this Hill article, by the way, long before DNC and Podesta emails. There were enough reasons in 2015 to see why Clinton would lose to Trump; Russia wasnt one of them.

Now we have a highly confident narrative that Russia hacked the election for Trump.

The state of American politics is abysmal and this latest quagmire will bring out yet another bizarre version of Democratic nationalism. Russia will be the scapegoat, and Sessions and Trump the Russian stooges, with Democrats ironically claiming that lying under oath is a serious crime.

Sessions and Flynn should have just approved the sale of 20% of U.S. uranium capacity to Russia, then Democrats would have found no link to Putin. Just imagine if Trump approved a deal that sent this uranium to Russia, as his foundation received cash from Uranium One; exactly what happened with Clinton.

Establishment Democrats still have trouble comprehending a New York Times piece titled Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.

The next chapter of our new McCarthy era will undoubtedly reveal new revelations about Sessions, Democrats, and what a frightened liberal electorate is willing to believe. Just remember, always remember, we could have had President Bernie Sanders. But the same Democrats blaming Russia preferred Clinton and believed Sanders was either too extreme, or unrealistic.

H. A. Goodman is the creator of Counter Propa and the thoughts above are inspired by his new publication. Follow Counter Propa on Twitter and Facebook

Link:
Did Jeff Sessions Speak to the Russian Ambassador About WikiLeaks DNC Emails? - Huffington Post

PARIS As WikiLeaks thrust itself into the heart of America's electoral contest last year, the group's chief spokesman tiptoed out of spotlight, stepping down from his job in a little-noticed move that leaves Julian Assange as the only public face of the radical transparency organization.

So discreet was journalist Kristinn Hrafnsson's departure as WikiLeaks' official representative that even in his native Iceland some fellow reporters didn't know his role had changed. Hrafnsson's Wikipedia page still describes the 54-year-old as WikiLeaks' spokesman, and some news outlets still try to reach him for comment when Assange is in the headlines.

"I'm not the WikiLeaks spokesman anymore," Hrafnsson confirmed in a telephone interview with The Associated Press from Iceland on Tuesday. He said he was still doing work for WikiLeaks and had chatted with Assange only a few days ago but had relinquished the role of chief media representative for personal reasons.

"Being on the road for six years gets pretty tiring," he added.

Hrafnsson's move comes as Assange's public profile is changing. His publication of Democratic Party emails in the heat of the American presidential election made Assange a hero for many on the right who had previously reviled the ex-hacker for revealing U.S. military and diplomatic secrets.

WikiLeaks is also changing, partially reinstating the Wikipedia-style user-driven editing that marked its early years and crowdsourcing some of its online public relations work with the help of a group called the WikiLeaks Task Force .

Hrafnsson acknowledged that his move was kept quiet, but said that had to be seen in the context of the ongoing U.S. investigation into WikiLeaks.

"In general, we try to protect our people," he said.

Hrafnsson first met Assange after the latter's 2009 exposure of a major Icelandic banking scandal turned him into an overnight hero in the tiny north Atlantic nation.

Hrafnsson traveled to Iraq in April 2010 to interview the children of the civilians gunned down by laughing American helicopter pilots an act captured by the infamous video later published by WikiLeaks under the title "Collateral Murder" and took up the role as WikiLeaks' press representative after Assange was arrested in late 2010 over sex crimes allegations in Sweden.

The group's previous spokesman, Daniel Domscheit-Berg, had earlier split with the group amid a bitter feud with Assange.

Hrafnsson became one of Assange's senior lieutenants and the tall, silver-haired journalist was often seen at Assange's side during his winding legal battle against extradition to Sweden. Hrafnsson was the only person other than Assange authorized to receive sensitive information on WikiLeaks' behalf and was one of only two other board members at Assange's Icelandic media company, Sunshine Press Productions, when it was registered in 2010.

People paying close attention to WikiLeaks' site may have caught a hint about Hrafnsson's changing role. In August, a new contact page described Hrafnsson as an "advocate" instead of "official WikiLeaks representative."

The same page says that now only Assange can receive sensitive information on WikiLeaks' behalf.

Visit link:
WikiLeaks spokesman quietly steps out of the spotlight - Minneapolis Star Tribune

(MENAFN - Jordan Times) hen a Fox News reporter asked Donald Trump about WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange back in 2010, just after Assange had released a huge cache of secret US diplomatic cables, the reality TV star had no doubts: 'I think it's disgraceful, I think there should be like the death penalty or something.'

Circumstances change, however, and smart people with big brains know when it is time to switch sides.

Trump has been having a problem with the main US intelligence agencies, which unanimously insist that the Russians did indeed hack the DNC's e-mails, and that they passed them to WikiLeaks (through an intermediary) in order to damage Clinton's presidential election campaign.

So Trump was very happy to be able to reply (in a tweet, of course) that 'Assange... said Russians did not give him the info!'

Well, there is the fact that Assange has been living in one room in the Ecuadorian embassy in London for the past four years in order to avoid being extradited to the US on espionage charges that could get him up to 45 years in prison.

Assange would not even have to lie outright, because the Russians would obviously never give him the e-mails directly.

Assange might have strong suspicions about who originally hacked the DNC, but he did not necessarily go all out to confirm them.

President Vladimir Putin has been quite open about prefering Trump to Clinton, and the leaks definitely gave a boost to Trump's election campaign in late July and August.

The event that probably did give Trump his very narrow margin of victory (100,000 votes spread among three key swing states) was FBI Director James Comey's bizarre decision to declare that Hillary Clinton was facing another investigation only 11 days before the vote.

He is questioning the intelligence services' conclusions about Russian interference because he believes (wrongly) that they undermine the validity of his election victory.

He said it himself (in another tweet): 'Having a good relationship with Russia is a good thing, not a bad thing. Only stupid people or fools would think that it is bad. We have enough problems around the world without yet another one.'

Trump's views on China give cause for alarm, but his desire for a reconciliation with Russia makes more sense than the reflex hostility that both Clinton and the US intelligence services bring to the relationship.

In seeking a rapprochement with Moscow, Trump should not make the mistake of accepting Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea. Changing borders by force (even if most of the local population approves of it) has been banned by international law for more than half a century, and we should not start making exceptions to that rule now.

There is much that the US and Russia could usefully cooperate on now, starting with putting an end to the war in Syria.

MENAFN0103201700280000ID1095279397

Link:
Trump, WikiLeaks and Russia - MENAFN.COM

The die seems cast for WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange as it becomes increasingly likely that the next Ecuadorean president will be Guillermo Lasso, a conservative former banker now holding the lead for the April 2 runoff election.

Lasso has vowed repeatedly that as president he would evict the alleged whistle-blower from their embassy in London, where Assange has lived for the last four and a half years.

The Ecuadorean people have been paying a cost that we should not have to bear, Lasso told The Guardian a few weeks ago. We will cordially ask Mr. Assange to leave within 30 days of assuming a mandate.

'RESTORE MY LIBERTY': ASSANGE PLEADS FOR FREEDOM WHILE HOLED UP IN EMBASSY

Assange, who is Australian, is wanted by U.S. authorities for publishing scores of classified documents back in 2010.

Our staff have been through a lot. There is a human cost, said Ecuadors foreign minister, Guillaume Long. This is probably the most watched embassy on the planet.

After two days of suspense, Ecuador's Electoral Council said a runoff was inevitable because President Rafael Correas handpicked successor failed to get the 40 percent needed to clench a first-round victory win Ecuador's fragmented opposition is now closing ranks around Lasso.

The new president will be installed May 24.

ASSANGE BLASTS 'EMBARRASSING' US INTEL REPORT, INSISTS RUSSIA NOT HIS SOURCE

Over the weekend, a lawyer for Assange admitted there is "great concern" that Lasso could force him out of the embassy.

"We are preparing potential legal remedies should the opposition come to power in Ecuador," said Jennifer Robinson to MSNBC Saturday.

"You don't change asylum protections just because a change of government," she added.

Assange fled to the Ecuadorean Embassy on June 19, 2012, after an unsuccessful legal battle to send him to Sweden, where he remains wanted over an allegation of rape.

The South American country granted him asylum, but British authorities have made clear they would arrest him if he tried to leave.

ASSANGE: DEMOCRATS LOST BECAUSE 'THEY DIDN'T PICK THE STRONGEST CANDIDATE'

After a decade of governance by President Correa, a socialist, many in the country of 16 million say they are tired of his confrontational style and alliances with Cuba and Venezuela.

Should Ecuador move to the right with a second-round victory for Lasso, it would follow on the heels of Argentina, Brazil and Peru which have all swerved away from the left.

Lasso has campaigned on a platform to revive the economy, which is dependent on exports of oil, flowers and shrimp, by slashing taxes, fostering foreign investment and creating a million jobs in four years.

The AP and Reuters contributed to this report.

More here:
WikiLeaks' Assange facing eviction from London's Ecuadorean embassy in June - Fox News

The repetitive cry goes out, over and over, in smoothly metallic tones garbled by electronic glitches: Illumination, for illumination, we called for illumination.

This snippet of a classified military field report from Iraq one of hundreds of thousands of such files passed along by Chelsea Manning and released to a bewildered public in 2010 by WikiLeaks is the text for one section of The Source, the unnerving and chaotic oratorio by composer Ted Hearne and librettist Mark Doten that opened a six-performance run over the weekend at SF Opera Lab.

It is also a deft encapsulation of the works raison detre.

Haunting, scattershot, seductive and overambitious, The Source represents a desperate attempt to shed some kind of light on the horrors of this chapter in U.S. history not only the venal crime of the Iraqi invasion itself, but the shadowy national security apparatus that was strengthened even further in its aftermath.

Mellissa Hughes sings in Ted Hearnes The Source at SF Opera Lab.

Mellissa Hughes sings in Ted Hearnes The Source at SF...

If the result, witnessed on Saturday, Feb, 25, at the Taube Theatre, delivered only intermittently on that promise, consider the depths of the darkness that the creators were trying to explore. The flashes of brilliance scattered throughout the 75 minutes of The Source like the searing bursts of rocket and artillery fire that crop up repeatedly as reference points are at once revelatory and disorienting.

An omnivorous eclecticism sets the tone for much of the evening. Dotens libretto is built largely around military and diplomatic logs, along with some of the online chat-room communications between Manning and Adrian Lamo, the hacker who eventually turned her over to the authorities. Much of this material is atomized into short fragments that float free of their syntactic moorings.

Hearnes music, scored for seven instrumentalists and a quartet of vocalists, is equally dissociative. There are soothing hymnal chorales and jittery rock grooves, soul ballads and eerie, keening solo vocal lines. Hearne also interjects tiny rapid-fire samples of pop-culture detritus Bobby Darins recording of Mack the Knife, snippets of TV talk shows to further unmoor the listener. You cant resist the beauty and urgency of this material, even as it whiplashes you from one stylistic vein to the next.

Perhaps the scores most inventive aspect is the electronic processing that Hearne overlays on the work of the four superlative singers (Mellissa Hughes, Samia Mounts, Isaiah Robinson and Jonathan Woody) who perform from perches nestled within the audience. Its a variant of the increasingly ubiquitous Auto-Tune, which gives an other-worldly, digital-age patina to the vocal writing; in everything these singers do, you can hear an undercurrent of human foibles struggling to resist the computers sleek soullessness.

Overall, Hearnes investigative methods here (as in his equally freewheeling Katrina Ballads) are not unlike those of a nuclear physicist: He bombards his subject with every kind of musical projectile he can lay his hands on, trying to determine some piece of truth from the angle of the ricochet.

This proves most effective when The Source confronts the war head-on, creating an ensemble portrait of military servicemen as disembodied but still all-too-human enactors of atrocity. A section devoted to Julian Assange, the elusive figure behind WikiLeaks, leaves much of his mystery intact; issues of gender identity (Manning was Bradley Manning when the leaking occurred, only to transition in prison ) are tentatively floated, then abandoned.

For this production, director Daniel Fish and videographer Jim Findlay have provided a visual backdrop, displayed on four large screens surrounding the audience. This is footage of a large range of New Yorkers as they watch leaked video footage of a scene of carnage perpetrated by an American helicopter crew on Baghdadi civilians; their expressions range from stoicism to unease to outright grief.

There is something exquisitely haunting about these reactions, which imply so much more than they state you can tell theres something horrific lurking off-camera, but its not until the final moments of the performance that you discover what it is.

The attack footage, unfortunately, brings with it an infusion of literalism that actually undercuts the power of everything thats come before. To show us the truth at this point everyday Iraqis being mowed down like grass reads like an admission that art is not up to the task.

But the potency of The Source, with all its jump cuts and musical feints, puts the lie to that assertion. There is illumination to be had, all right, even if its of an impressionistic and transitory nature.

Joshua Kosman is The San Francisco Chronicles music critic. Email: jkosman@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @JoshuaKosman

The Source: 8 p.m. Wednesday-Friday, March 1-3. $35. Taube Atrium Theater, Veterans Building, 401 Van Ness Ave., San Francisco. (415) 864-3330, http://www.sfopera.com

Excerpt from:
'The Source' takes a powerful, jumbled measure of WikiLeaks - San Francisco Chronicle

The mysterious "Vault 7" continues toarouse public curiosity.

WikiLeaks, an international non-profit organization that publishes news leaks and classified information, started releasing cryptic questions about "Vault 7" onTwitter onFebruary 4, 2017.

The riddle has prompted speculation amongsocial media users asto what exactly WikiLeaks was going toexpose this time. Some users suggested that it would be explosive revelations aboutthe 9/11 terror attacks inNew York City, while others opined that the international organization is aboutto leak a new portion ofHillary Clinton's emails.

WikiLeaks Exposes CIA's Meddling inFrench Presidential Election

A video released byAnonymous Scandinavia onTwitter hinted atthe possibility that something "big" is likely tosurface onFebruary 19.

"WikiLeaks asked what Vault 7 was, where Vault 7 was, and when is Vault 7. While the world waits forthe 'why' and 'who', we assume that the answer asto 'when' is onFebruary 19," the video said.

However, it was onFebruary 16 when Julian Assange tweeted aboutthe US Central Intelligence Agency's meddling inthe French presidential election back in2012.

"My new story: the CIA conducted a 10-month espionage operation targeting the last French presidential election," Assange wrote onhis brand new Twitter account.

According toCIA documents published byWikiLeaks, the US intelligence service officially ordered its agents topenetrate all the major political parties inFrance aswell astheir electronic systems beforethe country's 2012 presidential election.

Speaking toRadio Sputnik onSunday, veteran journalist Diana Johnstone said that this operation was obviously part ofa broader pattern.

"We know that the United States and the CIA inparticular are notorious forintervening inelections all overthe world. There is nothing surprising aboutthat," Johnstone remarked.

The unconfirmed claims regarding Russia's alleged interference intothe 2016 US election have immediately paled incomparison withthe large-scale cyber campaign launched bythe CIA againstFrance a few years ago.

The Flynn Scandal and Clinton's Aides' Alleged Meeting With the Chinese Ambassador

Meanwhile, onFebruary 19 WikiLeaks turned the spotlight onHillary Clinton's national campaign chairman John Podesta, whose emails it released last October.

One such email said that back inJanuary 2016 Chinese Ambassador tothe US Cui Tiankai sought "an informal, private, offthe record get-together" withthe Clinton campaign's top aides "to discuss the next year and the current state ofUS-China affairs."

Predictably, this email has taken ona new significance amidthe scandal overDonald Trump's former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn's alleged contacts withRussian Ambassador Sergei Kislyak.

However, tothe disappointment ofmany, neither WikiLeaks nor Assange have released anything explosive comparable tothe Iraq War Logs or the Podesta emails.

So, is the "Vault 7" mystery overhyped?

REUTERS/ Courtesy of WikiLeaks

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange holds up his new kitten at the Ecuadorian Embassy in central London, Britain, in this undated photograph released to Reuters on May 9, 2016

'We Open Governments': WikiLeaks' 'Vault 7' Exposures

Sputnik got intouch withCharles K. Ortel, an investigative journalist and renowned Wall Street analyst and investor, todiscuss this issue.

"I am happy totry answering your questions withthe caveat applying toeach ofmy answers that I am joining you inmaking educated guesses I have no connection, direct or indirect, withWikiLeaks or withanyone connected toWikiLeaks," Ortel responded toSputnik.

AP Photo/ Carolyn Kaster

"Under President Obama, the United States government and elements connected toit intervened inopenly expressing preferences concerning candidates and issues inforeign elections and referenda," the Wall Street analyst pointed out.

Donald Trump's victory was a bolt fromthe blue forHillary Clinton's supporters fromboth Democratic and Republican camps, prompting some ofthem toclaim that elements connected with "the Russians" had stepped into intervene inthe election.

"As a guess, WikiLeaks knows precisely who leaked the Podesta emails and that this source was not Russia or elements connected toRussia," Ortel said.

"Moreover, asa guess, WikiLeaks (and others) have obtained all ofthe missing Hillary Clinton emails and may have obtained emails found inOctober 2016 onAnthony Weiner's laptop computer. If so, WikiLeaks has much valuable information it could choose toshare ona schedule ofits own choosing," he suggested.

"If Vault 7 is a reference tothe 7th Floor atthe US State Department (which it may or may not be), then it is possible that the forthcoming release will document more intervention inforeign elections and referenda and show previously unseen communications and deliberations involving US government personnel, possibly including Hillary Clinton, her aides, and other members ofthe Obama Administration," Ortel noted.

According tothe analyst, it is also possible that WikiLeaks may release heretofore unseen communications explaining how the Clinton Foundation came tobe re-organized afterJanuary 20, 2009 when the Obama administration acquired the ability tounderstand how the Foundation and its affiliates operated outsidecompliance withapplicable state, federal and foreign laws fromOctober 23, 1997 when it was founded onwards.

"To me, the release of 'Vault 7' seems a natural progression inthe evolution ofWikiLeaks," Ortel noted, "and I should add that no credible person has argued that the Podesta emails, forexample, or other releases are forgeries, so their record is noteworthy and any additional releases should be taken seriously and reviewed carefully."

AFP 2016/ Brendan Smialowski

Clinton advisers Jake Sullivan (L), Nick Burns (2L) and John Podesta (2R) wait with Clinton Campaign Chairman, Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton for a meeting with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko on September 19, 2016 in New York.

Ecuadorian Elections: 'Vault 7' and Julian Assange's Future

Is it possible that the Vault 7 campaign was aimed atdrawing attention toJulian Assange amidthe Ecuadorian election, which took place onFebruary 19?

"Julian Assange may lose protection fromextradition that is afforded bythe Government ofEcuador, depending uponnational elections inprogress there, so your suggestion is certainly possible," the Wall Street analyst responded.

REUTERS/ Suzanne Plunkett/Files

However, the election is due togo toan April runoff betweenthe candidate fromthe Left, Lenin Moreno, and Lasso. That means that Assange's future is hanging inthe balance.

Can we assume that Assange postponed the much-discussed leak tothe time ofthe April runoff?

"I suspect that the next set ofWikiLeaks papers may drop earlier thanthis coming April if they are extensive, they may need many days todisseminate this information tothe general public," Ortel said.

'Vault 7' and Upcoming 2017 Elections inEurope

The Wall Street journalist believes that the forthcoming leaks would have something todo withEurope's 2017 elections inFrance, the Netherlands and Germany.

The release ofthe CIA's files concerning the 2012 French election could have been an appetizer.

"Watching the reaction inFrance, I suspect that WikiLeaks may wish tohave Vault 7 spread particularly toother nations scheduled tohold elections and referenda during2017," Ortel highlighted.

AP Photo/ Manuel Balce Ceneta

"I think Wikileaks has evolved tobecome a serious force and there is no doubt that powerful governments and individuals have positive and negative reasons toconsider intervening innational elections (and inthe affairs ofmulti-lateral grant-making government entities) so educating the general public concerning potential corruption and influence peddling is truly a welcome service," he said.

Ortel pointed outthat those who operate withingovernments using secrets have a paramount duty, underthe US Constitution, toobey laws, and toprotect secrets.

"Concerning the Podesta emails, what WikiLeaks shows us is rampant, so far unprosecuted criminality particularly withregard tosoliciting and spending funds inthe supposed care ofthe Clinton Foundation, and evident failures toprotect secrets, some ofwhich held commercial value (as well asbeing classified atthe highest levels)," the analyst stressed.

So should we expect more fromthe much discussed "Vault 7" campaign?

"Given its long record, and recognizing that WikiLeaks has become bigger thanJulian Assange alone, I fully expect more releases," Ortel emphasized.

The views expressed inthis article are solely those ofthe author and do not necessarily reflect the official position ofSputnik.

Read the original:
Mysterious #Vault7: What Secrets is WikiLeaks Due to Release? - Sputnik International

The following is via Breaking911.com:

Project Veritas is set to release hundreds of hours of secret video footage sent in by infiltrators from inside mainstream media newsrooms.

The projects founder, James OKeefe, made the announcement on Sean Hannitys radio show, hinting CNN is the prime target.

OKeefe: In the next 48 hours, Project Veritas, like Wikileaks, will be releasing hundreds of hours of tape from within the establishment media. Our next target is in fact, the media.

Hannity: How long have you been working on this?

OKeefe: Weve had people on the inside come to us. Just like Julian Assange has people come to him, weve had people, sources come to us and give us information, and were going to be releasing it Wikileaks Style this week.

READ MORE: BREAKING911.COM

Add your comment Subscribe to RSS Feed For This Article

View original post here:
O'Keefe To Release 'CNN Tapes' Thursday 'WikiLeaks Style' - Yeshiva World News

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange says Breitbart senior editor Milo Yiannopoulos is facing "censorship" amid controversy over a video in which the far-right provocateur appeared to defend pedophilia.

"US 'liberals' today celebrate the censorship of right-wing UK provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos over teen sex quote," Assange tweeted Monday night.

US 'liberals' today celebrate the censorship of right-wing UK provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos over teen sex quote.https://t.co/bz6dH0jyhk

Yiannopoulos has been facing backlash since a video clip gained traction on social media in which he says relationships between older men and young boys can be beneficial. In the clip, he also mentions his own sexual abuse.

Employees from Breitbart News, where Yiannopoulos works, are reportedly prepared to leave if the company doesn't take action.

And Simon & Schuster is canceling the publication of Yiannopoulos's book, "Dangerous."

In a Facebook post Monday, Yiannopoulos denounced the claims that he was advocating for pedophilia.

"I am a gay man, and a child abuse victim, Yiannopoulos wrote.

"I would like to restate my utter disgust at adults who sexually abuse minors. I am horrified by pedophilia and I have devoted large portions of my career as a journalist to exposing child abusers. I've outed three of them, in fact -- three more than most of my critics."

The government of Ecuador granted Assange asylum in 2012. Since then, he has been living inside the government's embassy in London.

Original post:
WikiLeaks's Assange: Yiannopoulos is facing 'censorship' - The Hill

Published time: 21 Feb, 2017 13:18Edited time: 22 Feb, 2017 16:21

Julian Assange has hit back at Ecuadorian presidential candidate Lenin Moreno for saying that the WikiLeaks founder should reduce his attempts to influence the politics of countries with which Ecuador has friendly relations.

In a tweet, Assange said hes open to discussions with Moreno and his rival candidate Guillermo Lasso but WikiLeaks will not respond to pressure.

Assange, who is sheltered in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, is facing an uncertain future after the countrys presidential election. Lasso, who has voiced his opposition to Assange and pledged to evict him from the embassy, may no longer be a threat according to the polls, but Moreno has spoken to RT of his own concerns over the WikiLeaks founder.

One thing that is clear is that Assange will have to reduce meddling in the policies of the nations we have friendly relations with, Moreno told RT Spanish.

Moreno cited the way [Assange] meddled with the election campaign in the United States as something one shouldnt do while at the embassy.

If you invite me to your place, I shouldnt say bad things about your friends. If you give me shelter and I enjoy your hospitality, I should also show you respect, the candidate said, adding that conditions would be set for Assange if he wishes to remain at the embassy.

Assanges tweeted comment that WikiLeaks publishes material online from the EU relates to the WikiLeaks servers, which are hosted in Sweden and a number of undisclosed locations. When the embassy was without internet in October Assange said WikiLeaks would not be affected as it does not publish from Ecuador.

READ MORE: Assange claims crazed Clinton campaign tried to hack WikiLeaks

At the time he said he was sympathetic to Ecuador, claiming it faced a dilemma of having the US interfere with its elections if it appeared to interfere with Americas elections.

See the original post here:
WikiLeaks 'will not respond to pressure' from Ecuador's presidential candidates Assange - RT