Slash Boxes

SoylentNews is people

posted by chromas on Wednesday August 01 2018, @01:31PM   Printer-friendly
from the delete-this dept.

Activist publishes 11,000 Wikileaks Twitter direct messages

An activist has published 11,000 direct messages on Twitter between the Wikileaks account and a group of its supporters. The direct messages were published by Emma Best on her own website. Her Twitter account states that she is a journalist on the East Coast. Best has been critical of Wikileaks and has advocated for government transparency. Some of the direct messages were previously published, but this is the first time all of the direct messages have been posted.

The messages show that Wikileaks wanted the GOP to defeat Hillary Clinton during the 2016 presidential elections. "We believe it would be much better for the GOP to win," the Wikileaks account states to a supporter named "Emmy B" in one of the messages from 2015.

Why would they do that?

Clinton: I don't recall joking about droning Julian Assange


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This discussion has been archived.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: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @06:49PM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 01 2018, @06:49PM (#715848)

    You don't need to go all the way to Alex Jones to find conspiracy theories, just turn on CNN.

  • (Score: 2) by ikanreed on Wednesday August 01 2018, @07:14PM

    by ikanreed (3164) on Wednesday August 01 2018, @07:14PM (#715860) Journal

    I mean... you're not gonna see me defend CNN, which exists to maximize advertising dollars within box that is pro-forma journalistic best practices, and no intention to actually follow the spirit of such practices with the aim of informing people. With way too much editorial analysis and not nearly enough critical analysis.

    But I suspect in this case, sans context, that you're conflating describing details of specific criminal conspiracies based on investigations and evidence produced, with the you know, common definition of conspiracy theories I was using: ascribing to unprovable secret malicious intent actions and events with very plausible and reasonable explanations in the public record. Even the pro-forma garbage practices of CNN limit that to only happening in pointless "both sides" panels.