You and I remembered different things about these emails. I asked if we really had to source and quote them to find out who is right and who is wrong.

There is no “horror” in DNC emails. just evidence of crass corruption and cynicism from Clinton’s campaign.

So wait, are you saying there is nothing significant in the Podesta emails… while at the same time the would have “made Trump elected”? :)

Some of the substance of the emails summarized here: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/10/us/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-wikileaks.html

• The speech of Clinton at Wall Street is one of the most devastating because she actually lied and used double speech all the way
• The efforts to undermine Sanders are despickable
• Inflating Trump campaign, of all GOP candidates, is both dumb, cynical and short-sighted.

But again that’s only the bits i personally remember from (reading) the emails.

All I said is:

• this was newsworthy and of general interest;
• any journalist like Assange, if given authentic, unaltered material of general interest has a duty to publish them. (that’s called journalism);
• there is no evidence that WikiLeaks knew their source was from RU intel (if it was). It was said many time the organisation functioned in such way that they cannot know the identity of their sources, and anyone who has ever been in the business of source protection would confirm it is a smart principle.

To other fantasy claims that “WL had the GOP emails too but decided not to published them lol” i replied “haha wait what?!” and was presented with meak links about “GOP got ‘hacked’ period” with no trace of email being transmitted to whoever.

Now please go on barking about my nickname, changing topic or whatever.

🥱