Russian Nuclear Bribery investigation reveals millions routed to the Clintons

I don't know. What does that have to do with your claim that Wikileaks paints incomplete pictures with their documents? I'm not even saying you're wrong, just want to understand what you are talking about.

 

I'm just going to post this again here.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/politics/rubio-will-not-discuss-wikileaks-emails/index.html

 

Really? You don't see how only posting hacked documents from one political side can paint an imcomplete picture? Marco Rubio certainly does.

 

no i dont. maybe if you give me an example of a document that gave an 'incomplete picture' it would help.

Just because Democrats are usually the targets of their leaks doesn't make the leaks inaccurate in any way.

 

Indirectly, Julian Assange said the DNC email leaks did not come from the Russians and that appears to patently false.

IIRC some of the DNC emails were modified by the Russians to be more inflammatory. I do not know if this has been independently verified.

 

Yes. I did and posted about it.

 

Seriously you are smarter than this. But just to humor you. Wikileaks released documents from the DNC showing that they didn't treat Sanders fairly. I will agree those were accurate. Without being aware of the that the RNC was also not treating candidates fairly, infact this was a charge that was levelled by many including the current President, paints an imcomplete picture the operating of the polticial parties.

 

For someone accusing others of being reading inept you should be more careful:

Nothing in the article exonerates Trump or his campaign from benefitting from Russian collusion.

 

So if I understand you correctly, you are skeptical of an article linked by Assange because Wikileaks once accurately showed documents proving the DNC colluded against Sanders (which led to 4 of the top 5 figures at the DNC being removed), but Wikileaks didn't show documents that the RNC colluded against candidates? That's your position?

 

Yeah guys, it was Russia and HILLARY colluding, that's why Russia hacked the DNC and released the content of their emails through Wikileaks. Hillary/Putin probably agreed to make this move of releasing the DNC emails move in order to make it look like they were in fact NOT colluding. Then, once Trump won the election as everyone predicted, the DEEP STATE would undergo their efforts to employ the single greatest witch hunt in political history and attack a sitting president who had done nothing wrong except fight for the will of the American people. Brilliance.

 

Somebody has to hack them first

 

Don't let this post be ignored.

So which is it?

 

I'm not skeptical of the article I'm skeptical of the timing of Assaunge pimping it out.
And yes ommission of information is often as damaging as an outright lie.

This is old news but if you don't believe that the GOP also doesn't have it's own issues with favoritism.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...on-picking-republican-delegates-idUSKCN0X81HE

 

it's still an absolute embarrassment that the best we could come up with to run for president from the 2 major parties was Clinton and Trump. Please let this be the bottom of the barrel.

 

I am not skeptical of the Wikileaks article. I think almost all politicians are crooks, certainly most Republicans as well as Democrats. That said, Julian Assange, has recently seemingly staked out a position that is aligned with the interests of Trump as well as those of the Russians. For example, he started releasing potentially damaging leaks (damaging to Clinton) on the same day that the Trump “grab them by the p***y” tape broke.
IIRC Clinton had once, well before the election, asked if there was a way that Assange could be “taken out”. Assange should not be viewed as being impartial.

 

from what i gather, what Wikileaks omitted was quotes from loud-mouth Trump saying 'the system is rigged'.

 

I posted this in the wikileaks thread, which this discussion is probably better held. It is a look though into why Assuange has such an act to grind against the Clintons.
http://bbs.clutchfans.net/index.php?threads/wikileak-thread.277988/page-7#post-10755311

 

I'm glad you agree with me that Trump is a loud mouth not to be believed. Will keep that in mind next time you defend him. Howabout Rick Santorum then?
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/s...ates-are-arbitrary-irrational/article/2565725