What Really Happened With Wikileaks This Morning?

Last night Julian Assange and Wikileaks celebrated it's 10 year anniversary with a press conference in Berlin. Julian attended via Skype, but several members of Wikileaks physically attended. The main stream media and alternative media made a big hullabaloo about the upcoming "October Surprise." Most of this comes from mis-quoting Julian, and twisting his words in a way that has not portrayed what his originally intended message was.

There was no leak last night, which was to be expected. With that being said, Julian did announce another million or so docs/emails to be released soon. He also stated that he does indeed have an upcoming leak regarding Hillary Clinton.

Check out my video breakdown. I believe this topic deserves some honest spin free attention:
youtu.be...


The MSM and alt media are now attacking Assange, claiming that he has let us down, and that he is "scamming" us. This simply is not the case. People believe that he will not be releasing Clinton related information until next year, which also is not the case.

Why would Wikileaks wait to release the information? The Clinton's want Julian dead. There is no benefit to sitting on information. Wikileaks has NEVER sat on info. As soon as they verify and sift through the information, they release it, and always have.

In the 10 years Wikileaks has been in operation, they have never let us down. They have also never given exact time frames, or given up exact information on what it is releasing.

What do you think?

I don't know why he's waiting- but I do know why the media is attacking him. It's an obvious setup to discredit the guy, and make him the peoples enemy. That way when he 'commits suicide' it won't turn him into a martyr.
Remember, the media - including most social media- is working for the banks.

originally posted by: Winstonian

What do you think?

I think it is time to put up or shut up. Wikileaks, or Assange, or somebody is teasing us. If there is something, put it out there. If there isn't, just shut up, but stop teasing for publicity.

I dont see the chess move in sitting on fire.

a reply to: Winstonian

I think there's a lot of goodness and benefit to Wikileaks holding off until mid-month if their release involves anything damaging to Clinton. That gives less time for her campaign and their media friends to spin it and re-assemble her voter base to still vote for her.

We're in an age of short term memory loss and instant gratification. Issues that should have long ago chased her from this race, like Benghazi, illegal nonchalant handling of classified emails, and the Clinton Foundation fiascos were exposed/discussed too early and now play less of a role than they should in this election. No reason to allow this, if it is something about her which may sway voters away from voting for her, to befall the same fate. Better to have it front and center and still piping hot fresh in voters' minds on that fateful day in November.

a reply to: Winstonian

Shocking! Wikileaks failed to deliver again about Clinton this election season...

I get he hates Hillary, and I agree with that, but not only is he making Wikileaks look bad because he continues to fail to deliver on his hype, but he has done nothing to expose the other party. Seems a little biased and makes me wonder if he's a Trump supporter.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

I think you got it, anything over a few days and people tend to forget. He has to time the release where it has time to make the rounds, but not too soon that it is forgotten. The news of the day changes day to day, especially with this election.

a reply to: Winstonian

Myunderstanding from the scant news on this issue is that there are very creditable threats against him, specifically surrounding a public announcement. So the event was cancelled.

MG

Unless anything they have lands her in prison (which it simply can't because every level of government and law enforcement is corrupt to the core and pushing her to victory( it wouldn't stop her voting base from voting for her anyway. Hell, they'd vote for her if she was in prison for molesting children with body parts of other dismembered children at this point. It's insane.

I don't see how waiting makes any difference, they might as well start installing a hospital room next to the oval office.

a reply to: Swills

I am sure he most likely is a "hold your nose" Trump supporter. He is the only other option. The establishment option wants Julian dead, so why would he not support the opposition?

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

If someone was trying to murder you, wouldn't you support the only person that can take your attacker down?

a reply to: lordcomac

Like I mention in the video, Wikileaks does not sit on information. Once they receive the information, they sift through it, verify it, and then release it. It can often be a long process because of the man hours it takes. The only reason they would sit on something is so that they can ensure their source is protected.

That did not work out so well for Seth Rich.

a reply to: Swills

Assange does not hate hillary, he feels sorry for her, tortured by her own ambition and all.

Perhaps people should actually pay attention to the content of things, like all of his interviews, instead of relying on mouth pieces that slant things in your political direction.

originally posted by: lordcomac
I don't know why he's waiting- but I do know why the media is attacking him. It's an obvious setup to discredit the guy, and make him the peoples enemy. That way when he 'commits suicide' it won't turn him into a martyr.
Remember, the media - including most social media- is working for the banks.

which banks own the guardian, mirror, independant, channel 4?
whats an obvious set up?
do you see conspiracies in every cup of coffee?

julian assange is just begging for attention and it's working, tons of people myself included tuned in to the various live streams. the "event" itself felt like nothing more than a huge infomercial for wikileaks!

a reply to: Winstonian

I couldn't watch the video, but it was obvious that hacks such as Roger Stone and Alex Jones were jumping the gun. Then again, Wikileaks is releasing their book...

a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Everyone ALWAYS jumps the gun. I know why they do it, but it really is dishonest. All the sensationalism for clicks. There is such little credibility. This is why the sleeping masses do not take the alternative media seriously yet. They do not know how to look past the hype portion yet.

a reply to: schuyler

How many times have we've seen this type of tease & letdown in the last 8 years?

Too many.

It always happens with disinfo agents.

originally posted by: lordcomac
but I do know why the media is attacking him. It's an obvious setup to discredit the guy, and make him the peoples enemy.

I've been wondering this same thing. I have to admit, I jumped on the "Assange is an ***hole troll" bandwagon for a minute. If TPTB wanted to discredit him while simultaneously making $Hillary look good, that was the perfect way to do it - twist his words and get everyone hyped and pumped for some big dump on her only to find out he's not releasing anything.

originally posted by: lordcomac
I don't know why he's waiting- but I do know why the media is attacking him. It's an obvious setup to discredit the guy, and make him the peoples enemy. That way when he 'commits suicide' it won't turn him into a martyr.
Remember, the media - including most social media- is working for the banks.

What banks control what social media sites? Sources?

originally posted by: RedMenace16

originally posted by: lordcomac
I don't know why he's waiting- but I do know why the media is attacking him. It's an obvious setup to discredit the guy, and make him the peoples enemy. That way when he 'commits suicide' it won't turn him into a martyr.
Remember, the media - including most social media- is working for the banks.

What banks control what social media sites? Sources?

I'm a skeptic. But what sources of media controlled by the banks would rat themselves out?