Latest WikiLeaks data dump is on the CIA itself

This is big, and it probably exonerates Trump and implicates former president Obama.  Good.  But this leak outs a whole bunch of CIA methodology and that is a national security breach.  A really serious one.  It's really bad.

What the CIA has been doing is also a concern.  Yes, they need to protect America. And they should have all tools at their disposal that they deem necessary.  But there's a big BUT: some of the methods they employ have wider reaching implications and possibilities for American citizens. What the CIA is capable of doing makes the Lois Lerner IRS targeting of various Tea Party groups kindergarten playground level stuff.  That's really, really bad. And the situation and potential needs to be debated as to the merits of allowing the CIA to have this capability and do these sorts of things.  If there is enough merit, how does it remain controlled and dedicated to a specific scope.  

And even the value of WikiLeaks itself is up for debate.  WikiLeaks is a double edged sword because with every exposure of American secrets, they reveal things that put Americans at risk because they weaken the institutions that were designed to protect America from foreign malfeasance.  The question now is whether those very institutions, like the CIA have grown beyond control and/or can simply be used by those in power in ways they were not designed to be used.

I wonder how long it will be before the Democrats blame the latest data dump by WikiLeaks on the Trump administration in an effort to exonerate themselves on the (unfounded) Russia claims in the media.

Leaked Clinton Emails: Illegal Coordination with SuperPACs

Wink, wink, nudge, nudge.

This should come as no surprise since everyone with half a brain realizes Democrats coordinate with the media on messaging all the time.

Via Law Newz:

Federal campaign finance laws generally prohibit a candidate’s election campaign from coordinating with the candidate’s super PAC. However, the law on what constitutes coordination is somewhat fuzzy, or open to wide interpretation, to say the least. The latest email dump from Wikileaks includes a legal memorandum that provides a perfect example of how far Clinton campaign lawyers are willing to go in interpreting what may be considered illegal coordination with a super PAC.

The April 2015 memorandum outlines a strategy for the Clinton campaign to work with the Priorities USA Action Fund super PAC (Priorities) in a manner that campaign lawyers argue does not rise to the level of coordination under campaign finance law. One particular focus of the memo is in the area of fundraising and the sharing donor information between the campaign and the super PAC.

The memo interprets the law as allowing the Clinton campaign to “identify donor prospects for Priorities and provide Priorities with the donors’ contact information using a specific template form approved by the legal team.” A footnote then explains why using the template form is so important:

Merely completing [the template form] likely would not be an in-kind contribution from [the campaign] to Priorities. However, sending over a substantial portion of HFA’s donor list likely would have to be valued and reported as an in-kind contribution.

In other words, it appears the campaign may be able to avoid a potential coordination violation by simply breaking up the donor list and sending it to the super PAC in small increments.

The Clinton WikiLeaks dump begins

I don't think this will be the worst of what gets leaked about Hillary Clinton but it's some some potent stuff.

Washington Post on WikiLeaks - nothing to see here

Julian Assange at WikiLeaks today instead of providing the promised Hillary takedown leaks, instead offered a delay.  No October surprise.  Not yet at least.  According to the liberal Washington Post, itès never coming.  Thatès what they want you to believe because, Heaven forbid, Assange actually has something, they don't want anyone to actually be paying attention when it gets revealed.  How absurd.

For weeks, backers of Republican nominee Donald Trump have hyped the tantalizing possibility that the anti-secrecy organization WikiLeaks was on the verge of publishing a set of documents that would doom Hillary Clinton’s chances in November.

...The group’s founder, Julian Assange, did nothing to dampen the enthusiasm, suggesting to Fox News hosts that his scoops could upend the race with documents “associated with the election campaign, some quite unexpected angles, some quite interesting.”

The announcement by WikiLeaks that it would host a major news conference Tuesday only seemed to confirm that the bombshell was ready to burst. The pro-Trump, anti-Clinton media world rippled with fevered speculation.

...Over the course of two hours Tuesday — with the world’s media and bleary-eyed Trump die-hards across the United States tuning in — Assange and other WikiLeaks officials railed against “neo-McCarthyist hysteria,” blasted the mainstream press, appealed for donations and plugged their books (“40 percent off!”).

But what they didn’t do was provide any new information about Clinton — or about anything else, really.

The much-vaunted news conference, as it turned out, was little more than an extended infomercial for WikiLeaks on the occasion of the 10th anniversary of its founding.

Nothing to see here folks, move along.  Notice the denigration of Assange and his attempt to procure donations?  Except Assange still has something to release he claims.

We'll see. The Washington Post seemingly however, has made up its mind.

Wikileaks - Hillary Clinton sold weapons to ISIS

 Wow. Is this for real???

Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, is a controversial character. But there’s no denying the emails he has picked up from inside the Democrat Party are real, and he’s willing to expose Hillary Clinton.

Now, he’s announcing that Hillary Clinton and her State Department were actively arming Islamic jihadists, which includes the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria.

Clinton has repeatedly denied these claims, including during multiple statements while under oath in front of the United States Senate.

WikiLeaks is about to prove Hillary Clinton deserves to be arrested

I am truly shocked. Waiting for more information to come in.

Julian Assange - useful

Several conservative pundits have criticized conservatives for erroneously cheering on Julian Assange.  No doubt Assange has been a double edged sword not only for conservatives but also for America.  His Wikileaks site has done more harm than good.  But it has done some good and it does serve a purpose.  I think it's fair to say that most people on the right are not lionizing Assange or Snowden and their ilk.  

It's not a good idea however, to ignore useful information when it's provided, no matter how it was obtained. This one issue has the potential not only to derail Hillary Clinton but also keep the Senate Republican. To ignore it, to not take advantage of it, is folly.

It does not mean that Assange will be invited at the next Republican convention to speak via satellite.  He is not a hero.  No one on the right is planning an Assange parade.  He is merely a convenient and welcome opportunity to be leveraged. I suspect most conservatives see him as nothing more or less and have not forgotten that the Chinese and others have benefitted from his actions, to the detriment of America.  That said, the political jiu jitsu of using your opponent's momentum to your favor is inarguably a smart thing to do.

One last thought for your consideration - doesn't the fact that Assange has access to all of this intelligence tell you something about the weakness of American cybersecurity?  The fact alone that he has brought to light the need to improve that, is another important purpose that Assange has served.

Assange: WikiLeaks source was from inside the DNC, not Russia

Just go read this.

SNOPES is already denying it's the truth.  SNOPES is often biased and interestingly updated it's page on it today, with no mention of Assange's most recent apparent claim.

Julian Assange: Hillary's going to end up in jail

Well, this bit from last week was quite interesting.  If what Assange says about the next WikiLeaks release means Hillary Clinton is going to jail, my only question is: WHEN? Because the timing does matter.

WikiLeaks: DNC did indeed conspire to defeat Bernie Sanders

On Friday, WikiLeaks released,

...a bombshell cache of DNC emails obtained by Russian hackers. Among other things, the documents purport to show the party apparatus favoring Clinton's campaign over the insurgency of Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders. The DNC did not immediately respond to CNBC's request for comment.

The news took center stage on social media, threatening to upend the Democrats' messaging and steal attention from a chaotic and divided Republican National Convention, which wrapped up on Thursday night. The email exchanges may reopen the wounds of a bitter Democratic primary season, just as the party kicks off its own national conference designed to highlight a unified, energized party.

Surprisingly so far the response from Team Sanders seems, underwhelming;

Bernie Sanders campaign manager Jeff Weaver said his team was "disappointed" by the emails from the Democratic National Committee leaked through WikiLeaks, which seemed to reveal staff in the party working to support Hillary Clinton.

"Someone does have to be held accountable," Weaver said during an interview with ABC News. "We spent 48 hours of public attention worrying about who in the [Donald] Trump campaign was going to be held responsible for the fact that some lines of Mrs. Obama's speech were taken by Mrs. Trump. Someone in the DNC needs to be held at least as accountable as the Trump campaign."

Team Trump at least, took it for what it was - an affront to a democratic process. Via Twitter:

Leaked e-mails of DNC show plans to destroy Bernie Sanders. Mock his heritage and much more. On-line from Wikileakes, really vicious. RIGGED

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 23, 2016

This should not only overshadow the Tim Kaine pick as VP, it should open the eyes of Sanders supporters as far as the DNC's impartiality is concerned. They should rightly up in arms over it, as should Sanders himself.

WikLeaks meanwhile is concerned that Twitter might be censoring their revealed information too. #TwitterGestapo apparently continues unabated.

Many people say @Twitter is censoring links to #DNCLeak emails. Please search https://t.co/kpFxYDoNyX select a result and try posting.

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) July 23, 2016

If Americans let Hillary win, it might be game over for the United States.

ADDENDUM:  More detail on some of the emails can be found here too.

Rand Paul endorsed by..Julian Assange?

Curious news of the day - Julian Assange has praised Rand Paul.  It's not exactly an earth shattering news item but on a dull news day like today, it will make some waves.

 

Via The Daily Caller;

Responding to questions during a Google Hangout session, Assange praised the college-aged supported libertarian faction of the Republican Party as the “only hope” for U.S. electoral politics.

“The libertarian aspect of the Republican Party is presently the only useful political voice really in the U.S. Congress,” said Assange.

The Wikileaks founder also praised Ron Paul and Matt Drudge. Color me confused. Yes, there is likely some alignment on the views of Assange with the libertarian wing of the GOP. But why say that? And why say that now? Does it alienate the Occupy Wall Street crowd who probably were in support of Assange? Likely, so that's not a good reason. Similarly it doesn't appear to do anything to help Assange with his current extradition woes or with fighting the charges against him.

If he really supports Rand Paul, does he believe his endorsement will have a net positive effect on Rand Paul's support? It could have a negative effect, and very possibly could create a GOP primary split that only complicates matters. It's hard to say whether Assange's comments are helpful or hurtful in terms of net effect for both Paul and the GOP, particularly given how many people see Assange as having leaked sensitive national security details. Assange must realize that as well, which makes his comments all the more curious.

That said, the semi-endorsement is interesting and could get a lot of people thinking about Rand Paul.

Obama to Russia; 'Let me tell you about British security'

From the Telegraph, WikiLeaks is reporting that the U.S. is apparently giving the Russians, as part of an arms control deal President Obama is expected to sign next week, information about Britain's nuclear capabilities;

Copenhagen Climate Accord - Because Obama's Different

Climate Police?

The U.K. publisher The Guardian has an interesting article on some of the events leading up to the Copenhagen Climate Accord.  One of the interesting outcroppings of the WikiLeaks scandal, is the apparent manipulation and behind the scenes arm twisting that went on to get other nations on board for the accord.

While I'm certainly not a fan of WikiLeaks' political agenda under the supposed guise of transparency, this is an interesting twist;

It's a Good News Day for the GOP

Rasmussen Reports has a number of good news items today - the generic Congressional ballot of likely voters has the GOP up 10 points, and the Obama approval index is at -20.  But the good news doesn't stop there.