Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday October 03 2016, @09:37AM   Printer-friendly
from the within-snipers-reach dept.

Wikileaks has abruptly canceled a much-anticipated announcement on Tuesday. The announcement had been expected to be founder Julian Assange's long-promised document dump on Hillary Clinton.

NBC's Jesse Rodriguez reported that the Tuesday announcement — which was to come from the balcony of London's Ecuadorian Embassy, where Assange has sought sanctuary for years – was canceled due to security concerns.

Wikileaks has not said when it will now make its announcement.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 03 2016, @04:37PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 03 2016, @04:37PM (#409501)
    My worry is that Assange hasn't been sitting on this explosive information for months. I fear that he's been working for months having folks build up a detailed fake. One that can't be conclusively debunked in four weeks. Then he can release it in October, let it do its damage, then we can figure out what really happened later, under President Trump.
    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   1  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 03 2016, @05:15PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 03 2016, @05:15PM (#409520)

    If the Wikileaks surprise isn't just some emails about matzo balls, it's going to get the most extreme media vetting in history. Many media outlets will be searching for a weakness in the material.

  • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday October 03 2016, @05:15PM

    by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 03 2016, @05:15PM (#409521)

    One that can't be conclusively debunked in four weeks.

    Why? How? I think its a valid alternative-history-esque scenario to ponder.

    For that matter, why him, obviously the hive mind on /pol/ is smarter than everyone else (you'll note the nominee is Trump not Jeb) the reddit centipedes are more numerous but not quite as intelligent, regardless, either group contain people smart enough to put on quite a show.

    But what would that show be? Its not obvious.

    Note the hidden assumption that he's in charge of the data and where it came from. Remember that guy Hillary had killed for the emails released around the DNC? The emails explaining how Hillary had the party rig her nomination and it was all a scam what they did to Bernie? The emails that had no real effect? I could see some kind of deal like release half of them around the DNC and if he mysteriously shows up dead like so many opponents of the Clinton crime family, then release the other half in October as revenge. But they had no real long term effect. Everyone knows Hillary is a crook and no one voting for her minds that.

    So what could it possibly be that would actually have an impact? Corrupt politics as usual has not had an effect yet, America loves our crime bosses. My guess is something personal like Chelsea's dad is not Bill and part of the deal is Bill stays around but gets all the interns he wants. Or Hillaries medical records showing some sort of illegal drug addiction or maybe HIV (from Bill? From one of her female interns?) or similar. Perhaps enough financial data for the IRS to take her down, something that can't be covered up as has been so many times. Maybe she admitted to some felonies in her 30K "missing" emails.

    I mean, most of the stuff that was of the class of conspiracy theory decades ago is just admitted BAU now for the Clinton crime family. So how do you one up the existing historical felonious behavior?

    Assange does not have to be in charge any more than a nightly news reader on TV is in charge of much of anything, despite being quite a famous spokesman.

    • (Score: 1) by angst_ridden_hipster on Monday October 03 2016, @06:51PM

      by angst_ridden_hipster (5616) on Monday October 03 2016, @06:51PM (#409573) Homepage

      Remember that guy Hillary had killed for the emails released around the DNC?

      No, I remember a lot of speculation without a scintilla of any real evidence. Same as most of the things you mention.

      We get it. You hate Hillary. Some people do.

      --
      Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachtani?
      www.fogbound.net
      • (Score: 2) by VLM on Monday October 03 2016, @07:13PM

        by VLM (445) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 03 2016, @07:13PM (#409588)

        Well, OK, but what about "how to design something politically effective that can't be debunked in four weeks"

        I think that's a valid non-partisan-ish question. I suppose someone could use something similar against Trump too, unless its a very Hillary specific attack. Perhaps anything that can be obfuscated for four weeks is inherently very personal and individual. Or maybe it just doesn't exist.

        I can't figure out a valid strategy, can't even guess the outlines... I'm on very shaky ground claiming that proves nothing could exist under that criteria, but it is starting to look that way.

        Its probably easier to find something derailing that lasts 4 weeks because its true, rather than something daydreamed up one afternoon that passes scrutiny.

  • (Score: 1) by boxfetish on Monday October 03 2016, @06:23PM

    by boxfetish (4831) on Monday October 03 2016, @06:23PM (#409553)

    Or maybe he is working up an obvious fake that can be debunked in a matter of a few days or weeks to make her appear as more of a victim/sympathetic figure and further add to the tagline "Hillary has been targeted for decades but nobody has ever found anything that sticks"

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 03 2016, @06:34PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 03 2016, @06:34PM (#409560)

      No. Assange has a major hard-on for clinton. Its been obvious for quite a while. He's got no particular reason to like her, and lots of reasons to hate her since she's probably involved, at a minium as a figurehead as secretary of state, wrt to his effective imprisonment for however many years he's been holed up in that embassy. If he's secretly been rooting for her all this time, its one of the greatest long cons ever played.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 05 2016, @12:15AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday October 05 2016, @12:15AM (#410411)

    If Wikileaks was in the business of making fakes everyone would have been aware of it by now. He has no reason to risk his reputation by deliberately making a fake after working so hard to build a good reputation over so many years as a source that won't do such a thing.