With a Murdoch-employed smear merchant for 'balance'.
2.333335
Average: 2.3(3 votes)
Comments
Truthy (Member)
All he did was push a bogus conspiracy (Seth Rich) to cover for GRU hacks of DNC e-mails and coordinate their release with Roger Stone and GRU. And this is only the latest of the shit-smearing goober that is Assange. What makes it worse is that he posed as a component of transperancy in information, while editing and creating a narrative. The only good thing about him is his cat.
Now the DOJ will use this chance to indict him under terms that will further limit whistleblowers in the US.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
Roger Stone has nothing to do with anything. GRU hacking Podesta's emails is a bogus conspiracy theory.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
It is based on evidence. What you are spouting is a conspiracy theory. You seem lost.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
it's based on analysis done by Crowdstrike - a private company hired by the DNC with a history of getting things completely wrong & way out of their depth in terms of discovering who's behind something like this with any real certainty.
The claim that GRU exfil'ed Podesta's emails is about as valid as Iraq mobile WMD labs.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
All your arguments seem to be based on such flimsy assumptions. What you say is factually false, because there were several cybersecurity firms that analyzed the evidence. Nice cherry pick, though. And that picked cherry is so unsubstantial and non-sequitir ir shows how you are grabbing at straws. Qewt. Mental gymnastics of a cultist.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
There was one company who analysed the evidence - Crowdstrike. They're the only company who handled the evidence. They submitted their summary by way of a couple of vague blog posts that claims they found a pattern (APT29) which was already associated with a Russian cyber crew. 2 or 3 companies concurred that this pattern is indeed associated with Russia.
There are several problems with this conclusion. But since you obviously know nothing about the subject I'll not waste time going into it. Your ad hominem arguments are amazing btw. Super convincing.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
Wouldn't have the other companies found the errors in Crowdstrikes findings? Enough for the inteligence agencies to conclude with "high confidence" that is was the russians and the grand jury found it suffiecient enough to indict. But don't let that change what RT tells you to think.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
CIA and FBI expressed “high confidence”. NSA had “moderate confidence.”
CIA is in the business of lies & deception so it really is just the FBI who has "high confidence" - a term which means they don't have evidence.
The ruling by the grand jury is nothing to write home about. It's not a real court case with a defendant & it's not like they had access to the DNC servers or the expertise to analyse the data. Only Crowdstrike had access.
It's possible the NSA could have came to the same conclusion with their own analysis of whatever traffic they log, which according to Snowden is pretty much the entire internet outside of China ..... but they didn't.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
Ok, so then this case will get tossed out, as it is flimsy and all the evidence just points to a deeper conspiracy against russia. But I mean, we all know about the deep state russophobia and all that, so it won't happen.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
Brennan lied for months and when it didn't pan out he backtracked. The CIA is a large wing of the deep state and specializes at lying and psychological operations. Your account is less than two days old. What drove you to establish an account so you could comment and what do you think of this site?
Crowdstrike has a history of generating false conspiracies based on deliberate misinfo or at the very least incompetence. Anyone who cites crowdstrike is either ignorant or engaged in deliberate disinfo.
The special prosecutor just told you that the horseshit the MSM has been peddling regarding collusion was false. Yet here you are still trying to push the same narrative via "Russia hacked the election." Why? Assange is charged with assisting with the disclosure of sensitive military info. The fact that you are still trying to push the "Russia hacked the election" narrative with your 36-hour-young account is bizarre dude.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
Lied about what? COUNTERPUNCH OFFGUARDIAN Nice fox news/RT talking points. They hold up only in the heads of right-wing cultists and other conspiracy nuts.
MSM was right about pretty much everything it reported on the last two years, as the Mueller report confirms. So eat your own words.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
MSM was right about pretty much everything it reported on the last two years
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
In regards to the russian investigation they were mostly right and their reporting did indeed represent the campaign's contacts with the ruskies and the other shady shit they did. All you are left with is Trump's word and some whackjobs calling themselves journalists IN BLOGS. If Crowdstrike did make a mistake don't you think that the three private firms woudl have found something wrong with it and on top of that the Intel services? Pathetic conspiracy nuts is all you are and ever will be.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
danmanjones (Old Spike)
Pathetic conspiracy nuts is all you are and ever will be.
there goes that projection again, eh
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Truthy (Member)
Projection? Nope, just facts. I know you have a hard time with them, but whatever.
+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
skeptoid (Old Spike)
MSM was right about pretty much everything it reported on the last two years
The two-day-old account doesn't help, but this brainfart from you eliminates what's left of your credibility. You must be trolling - we're used to it here.
Comments
(Member)
All he did was push a bogus conspiracy (Seth Rich) to cover for GRU hacks of DNC e-mails and coordinate their release with Roger Stone and GRU. And this is only the latest of the shit-smearing goober that is Assange. What makes it worse is that he posed as a component of transperancy in information, while editing and creating a narrative. The only good thing about him is his cat.
Now the DOJ will use this chance to indict him under terms that will further limit whistleblowers in the US.
(Old Spike)
Roger Stone has nothing to do with anything. GRU hacking Podesta's emails is a bogus conspiracy theory.
(Member)
It is based on evidence. What you are spouting is a conspiracy theory. You seem lost.
(Old Spike)
it's based on analysis done by Crowdstrike - a private company hired by the DNC with a history of getting things completely wrong & way out of their depth in terms of discovering who's behind something like this with any real certainty.
The claim that GRU exfil'ed Podesta's emails is about as valid as Iraq mobile WMD labs.
(Member)
All your arguments seem to be based on such flimsy assumptions. What you say is factually false, because there were several cybersecurity firms that analyzed the evidence. Nice cherry pick, though. And that picked cherry is so unsubstantial and non-sequitir ir shows how you are grabbing at straws. Qewt. Mental gymnastics of a cultist.
(Old Spike)
There was one company who analysed the evidence - Crowdstrike. They're the only company who handled the evidence. They submitted their summary by way of a couple of vague blog posts that claims they found a pattern (APT29) which was already associated with a Russian cyber crew. 2 or 3 companies concurred that this pattern is indeed associated with Russia.
There are several problems with this conclusion. But since you obviously know nothing about the subject I'll not waste time going into it. Your ad hominem arguments are amazing btw. Super convincing.
(Member)
Wouldn't have the other companies found the errors in Crowdstrikes findings? Enough for the inteligence agencies to conclude with "high confidence" that is was the russians and the grand jury found it suffiecient enough to indict. But don't let that change what RT tells you to think.
(Old Spike)
CIA and FBI expressed “high confidence”. NSA had “moderate confidence.”
CIA is in the business of lies & deception so it really is just the FBI who has "high confidence" - a term which means they don't have evidence.
The ruling by the grand jury is nothing to write home about. It's not a real court case with a defendant & it's not like they had access to the DNC servers or the expertise to analyse the data. Only Crowdstrike had access.
It's possible the NSA could have came to the same conclusion with their own analysis of whatever traffic they log, which according to Snowden is pretty much the entire internet outside of China ..... but they didn't.
(Member)
Ok, so then this case will get tossed out, as it is flimsy and all the evidence just points to a deeper conspiracy against russia. But I mean, we all know about the deep state russophobia and all that, so it won't happen.
(Old Spike)
Brennan lied for months and when it didn't pan out he backtracked. The CIA is a large wing of the deep state and specializes at lying and psychological operations. Your account is less than two days old. What drove you to establish an account so you could comment and what do you think of this site?
Crowdstrike has a history of generating false conspiracies based on deliberate misinfo or at the very least incompetence. Anyone who cites crowdstrike is either ignorant or engaged in deliberate disinfo.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/03/23/cybersecurity-firm-that-attributed-dnc-hacks-to-russia-may-have-fabricated-russia-hacking-in-ukraine/
https://off-guardian.org/2017/03/27/crowdstrike-how-the-guardian-delivers-its-fake-news/
The special prosecutor just told you that the horseshit the MSM has been peddling regarding collusion was false. Yet here you are still trying to push the same narrative via "Russia hacked the election." Why? Assange is charged with assisting with the disclosure of sensitive military info. The fact that you are still trying to push the "Russia hacked the election" narrative with your 36-hour-young account is bizarre dude.
(Member)
Lied about what? COUNTERPUNCH OFFGUARDIAN Nice fox news/RT talking points. They hold up only in the heads of right-wing cultists and other conspiracy nuts.
MSM was right about pretty much everything it reported on the last two years, as the Mueller report confirms. So eat your own words.
(Old Spike)
MSM was right about pretty much everything it reported on the last two years
(Member)
In regards to the russian investigation they were mostly right and their reporting did indeed represent the campaign's contacts with the ruskies and the other shady shit they did. All you are left with is Trump's word and some whackjobs calling themselves journalists IN BLOGS. If Crowdstrike did make a mistake don't you think that the three private firms woudl have found something wrong with it and on top of that the Intel services? Pathetic conspiracy nuts is all you are and ever will be.
(Old Spike)
Pathetic conspiracy nuts is all you are and ever will be.
there goes that projection again, eh
(Member)
Projection? Nope, just facts. I know you have a hard time with them, but whatever.
(Old Spike)
MSM was right about pretty much everything it reported on the last two years
The two-day-old account doesn't help, but this brainfart from you eliminates what's left of your credibility. You must be trolling - we're used to it here.