But the emails…

WikiLeaks continues to drip feed emails into the US presidential campaign.

Fox News: Emails show ’08 Clinton camp probed Obama vulnerability on Muslim father, cocaine use

Another day, another batch of WikiLeaks emails – this time, showing the 2008 Hillary Clinton campaign’s efforts to test then-Sen. Barack Obama’s potential vulnerabilities, including on deeply personal matters like his father’s Muslim faith and his own past cocaine use.

WikiLeaks say they will keep leaking ‘daily’ but this is a continuation of stuff that is not getting the attention of the Trump sexual assault stories. It’s mostly very dry and convoluted, and is failing to make many headlines.

Often of more interest is why WikiLeaks is effectively campaigning against Clinton.

From the UK Guardian: From liberal beacon to a prop for Trump: what has happened to WikiLeaks?

How did WikiLeaks go from darling of the liberal left and scourge of American imperialism to apparent tool of Donald Trump’s divisive, incendiary presidential campaign?

Robert Mackey of The Intercept website wrote in August: “The WikiLeaks Twitter feed has started to look more like the stream of an opposition research firm working mainly to undermine Hillary Clinton than the updates of a non-partisan platform for whistleblowers.”

The seeming alliance between Trump and WikiLeaks is an astonishing role reversal. In 2010 it was lauded by transparency campaigners for releasing, in cooperation with publications including the Guardian, more than a quarter of a million classified cables from US embassies around the world. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange became a hero to many.

At the time, Republican politicians expressed outrage at WikiLeaks, but now some are seizing on its revelations as potential salvation for Trump’s ailing candidacy.

Conversely, liberal activists have expressed dismay at the hack of Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s email account and the calculated timing of the release.

Last week US intelligence officials blamed Russia for previous hacks. It is not yet known whether Podesta’s emails were hacked by the Russians, but US officials say the attack fits the same pattern. Russian president Vladimir Putin has denied the allegation.

Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook told reporters on Thursday: “The Department of Homeland Security took the unprecedented step of saying … beyond any doubt that this hack and then the leaking of the emails was perpetrated by the Russian government for the purpose of intervening in the election and trying to affect the outcome in favor of Donald Trump. This is getting closer and closer to the Trump campaign itself.”

All of which raises the question: do Assange, Putin and Trump form a triangle? Are they in communication with each other or merely exploiting a coincidence of interests?

Trump has praised Putin and numerous links with Russia have emerged this year. But on Wednesday he denied any business interests beyond staging Miss Universe there. He has contradicted earlier statements about knowing Putin.

Some observers argue that Assange’s war on Clinton is personal: she was secretary of state at the time of the diplomatic cables leak. Her perceived secrecy and hawkish foreign policy represents the antithesis of his anti-US imperialist worldview. The capricious, nihilistic, non-ideological Trump might seem like a kindred spirit by comparison.

Alina Polyakova, deputy director of the Eurasia Center at the Atlantic Council think tank in Washington, said: “My impression of Julian Assange is that he sees US hegemony in the international world order as the biggest problem facing us today. In his attempt to bring ‘transparency’, he ends up siding with the very regimes that deny transparency and human rights. That’s the irony of my enemy’s enemy is my friend.”

So far WikiLeak’s campaign against Clinton has been largely ineffectual.

If the Republicans had chosen a safer traditional type candidate they could have chugged away and let Wikileaks damage Clinton.

But they have Trump, who has used the media adeptly to get the nomination, but that has now turned dramatically against him.

Previous Post
Leave a comment


  1. If you have email material of interest by all means post it – but if you just cut and post stuff from crank sites then be prepared to either substantiated it or have it examined.

    • Gezza

       /  15th October 2016

      Has Klik been here already or this just a pre-emptive strike? 😳

    • Conspiratoor

       /  15th October 2016

      “be prepared to either substantiate it or have it examined”. The irony is rich in this one.

      Yet we see the anti-trump crusaders here and elsewhere quite happy to feed the media frenzy by parroting unproven claims by women who ‘are only now coming forward’ to claim trump touched them ‘inappropriately’ decades ago. He’s no saint but this cuts both ways

  2. The Clinton campain manager/s knew this would drop and have saved the best/worst hit jobs on Trump to provide the media with all they need to buried anything that casts Hillary in a bad light

    Both are unfit to be POTUC and the nominal leader of the “free world”. What an absolute joke US politics have become. The puppet masters need to reset the electoral process to give a more convincing facsimile of representational democracy, because the current tweedle dum and tweedle dee isn’t looking at all life like or real

    • Gezza

       /  15th October 2016

      The whole campaign has descended into farce. Even the candidates have become carricatures of themselves. Whichever one of them gets elected, and it’s looking more & more like Clinton, their term as President might even end up being cut short with an impeachment, and how on earth could either of them expect to implement any kind of policy programme? The media might well be making hay with Trump at the moment but who & what will they play with for attention & ratings after the election?

      • Indeed G….. you would expect a Clinton, H. presidency to be a gold for the media. But I actually think she won’t be held to account at all by her fanbois at the NYT, WaPo, CNN and the 3 big networks….

        A sad time for democracy when these 2 are the best you can put up to lead.

      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  15th October 2016

        Presuming Clinton wins, what happens to Trump’s movement of supporters for change? Do the Republicans try to cut them loose or further motivate them? Who would become their leader? Does Trump have a Plan B even though he denies it?

        It’s hard to see a Clinton presidency doing much to reconcile the divisions. There will be chickens coming home to roost both internationally and domestically to cause increasing tensions.

        • Gezza

           /  15th October 2016

          Interesting question Alan. I don’t know. With Trump having no seat in Congress, that leaves the Republican establishment back in the driving seat with voters, and I wonder if Trumpy has effectively sold part of their constituency on the idea they’re part of the big money corporate-bought conspiracy against the uneducated jobless little guy too.

          Was the media particularly anti-Republican/pro Democrat before Trump hijacked the GOP? One thing I do think is that after the election there’ll be plenty of ammo to hammer Clinton with. I hear what dave is saying, but I don’t know if the media could resist the sensationalism opportunities the wikileaks emails are offering once the Trump comedy hour is over.

          Trump’s maybe just an easy target at the moment because he’s such an unthinking egomaniac & he damns himself all the time. In his Greensboro speech, at one point, he typically says, when speaking about these women’s allegations, “In just about all cases, it’s nonsense!”.

  3. Alan Wilkinson

     /  15th October 2016

    From what I’ve seen the emails just confirm a seamless alliance between the Democrats’ Government, media and political wings in the exercise and maintenance of power. The only key player not yet fingered is the judiciary but I wonder for how long.

    • Probably, yes. I think one key reason is that it isn’t getting a lot of traction as an election issue is that most of it is what many people expect so they are not surprised.

      People in power send emails amongst themselves. They say things differently to what they say in public.

      This is hardly shocking.

    • But I guess you could say that many people won’t be surprised to see confirmation that Trump is a sleaze ball.

      The difference is sex versus political emails. One makes headlines, the other bores most people.

  4. Kevin

     /  15th October 2016

    It is a mystery. You would expect Wikileaks to be neutral and be publishing as much dirt on Trump as it has on Hillary. Personally I’m paying as much attention to the leaks as what I’m doing the allegations of sexually harassment against Trump and his fitness as president i.e.. Very little. And for the same reasons.

  5. patupaiarehe

     /  15th October 2016

  6. Hillary… and this incident will come back for her methinks… She is very unconvincing here and the linkage of her government role to a friends business dealings is interesting as well

    • Corky

       /  16th October 2016

      Geez, I love this good ole boy. Liberals hate these type of so-called Hosers.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: