New CIA Leak Reveals that Wikileaks Could Be a Department of the KGB

Comments

1
This crossed my mind yesterday.
2
And Assange used to be such a darling of the lefties.
3
You're just now figuring this out? Obvious for a year now; Wikileaks is a subsidiary of the Russian government.
4
Wtf I thought that leftists loved wikileaks. Or was that just a 2008 MUH COLLATERAL MURDER thing?
6
We're not allowed to discuss this. Any time Russian involvement is mentioned, we're supposed to say that talking about Russia is a distraction and then remind everyone how horrible a candidate Hillary Clinton was and that the DNC must apologize to Bernie Sanders' supporters, or else we'll get another term of Trump.
7
@2 the endless warehouse of straw-lefties, perhaps. Keep burning them and you'll eventually run out. ;)
9
@5,
Because "Stigginit."

From urbandictionary.com:
Stigginit: Stigginit is a portmanteau of the phrase "sticking it to the libs (liberals)." The word apparently originated on Fark.com as a way to mock the practice of some conservatives who engage in a practice not because of merit or self interest, but merely because the practice is opposed by a liberal, especially in those cases where the practice is clearly against one's self interest.
Those libs want to raise the minimum wage, and even though I work at McDonalds I'm going to vote Trump because Stigginit!
10
@2, 4: yeah, you don't know much about mainstream liberals then, do you? the ones that didn't vote for Bernie or Stein. the realists, not the idealists. despite sparring with them every day on Slog.

the CIA isn't going to be neutered on this. if Manafort et al colluded with the FSB to launch the hacks, the troll armies, and the disinformation, it's coming out. you know and I know he had the motive, opportunity, and means.
11
Of course Wikileaks would never leak Kremlin emails.
13
@ 12: “As an example, specific CIA malware revealed in ‘Year Zero’ is able to penetrate, infest and control both the Android phone and iPhone software that runs or has run presidential Twitter accounts,” the WikiLeaks release stated.

Fox News sees the relevance: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/03/07/wik…

14
I agree. This is bad reporting. You make a claim that Wikileaks is an agent of Russia. Did you have a bad dream or did you get this idea from an old Mad Magazine?
15
Such an exciting week and it's only Tuesday.
16
@5 I dunno, it's just that wikileaks and Snowden et al used to be utterly esteemed patron saints of justice and civic duty in mainstream liberal opinion. Then the DNC leaks happened and now all of a sudden they want Assange to hang for some reason. It's all very fickle. Same thing goes for sticking up for the CIA when they used to be nothing but a bunch of nation-wrecking baby killers who fabricated reasons for going to war and also introduced crack into the inner cities blah blah blah.
17
Pretty weak tea, Charles.

btw, why is it a fantastic claim to say that Trump was under surveillance? I don't know whether he was but the Clinton camp already said that he was working with Putin before the elections. Was Flynn under surveillance? Surveillance agencies never do that kind of stuff? I don't get it.
18
The KGB hasn't existed for over 25 years.
19
Fascinating to watch liberals like Mudede double down on the failures of the Clinton campaign by becoming the CIA's bestest buddies.
20
@18, it's still KGB for me.
21
Russian operatives just jealous that we get the raw feed of Melania taking baths and kids getting bedtime stories about Putin the brave warrior
22
2, 16 - What if, and I'm just speculating here, that the FSB --with Assange sequestered in an embassy, mostly out of the way-- didn't simply infiltrate Wikileaks' organizational structure.

It's perhaps not that observers are "fickle", but maybe the object has changed.

18 - KGB, FSB.... same thing, different acronym.
23
@14 Perhaps he could have been more clear that the wikileaks/Russia has been widely reported by US intelligence agencies today.

If true, it's pretty clever on the Kremlin's part. Get us to use our democracy against ourselves. Also, Assange always sucked.
http://www.rawstory.com/2011/02/assange-…
24
I get the notion why liberals love the idea that Putin stole the election for Clinton. It saves then a lot of heartache about Clinton's loss to Trump, it is just so much easier to blame a foreign power than to face our country's woes that seem deeper now then ever before.

Not that blaming a foreign power is going to help much in the long term (in fact it guaranteed to being its own host of headaches). But Charles here, poor Charles, seems to be descending into outright conspiracy theories.

When you are uncovering "proof" where none exists that Putin is some uber-spy and heading a secretly reconstituted KGB that has grown to become the the omnipotent world-dominating masters of manipulation, then you gone off a cliff.

It's tragic to see happen to a writer I once held in some esteem. The election of Trump has caused liberals to go mad. But in the extremes of Russophobia the madness is becoming quite literal.
25
UMBRAGE. Wow. Obama was ruthless.
26
@24, do not shed tears for me. i'm no lover of the CIA. and i actually think hillary lost because she was a party hack. i have said as much: http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/01/…

putin could not have stopped a strong or popular candidate, which hillary wasn't.

but i was alarmed by these developments. sorry, they cannot be ignored or brushed away.
27
@24: here is my post on centrists: http://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/01/…
28
Regarding Wikileaks and its loyalties, I find this quote by Humbert Wolfe apposite:

You cannot hope to bribe or twist
- thank God! -
the British journalist.

But, seeing what the man will do,
unbribed,
there's no occasion to.
29
24 - You are missing the real point. It's not that Russia interfered with our election process, which is possible but IMHO still non-conclusively proven.

The issue is that Putin et. al. may have dangerous compromising information on our President, and the President has financial and legal entanglements that debase his patriotism to his homeland, for which he serves. If Trump can be manipulated by Russians --again, due to kompromat or financial obligations-- then he cannot effectively rule, ahem serve as president.

Do you want a president who may have treasonous relations? Are you in favor of treason? Or having our pres be manipulated -- now, and going forward?

If Trump has nothing to hide, he has nothing to fear... right?

So why worry and get all in a flap about it?
30
@14,This is not a new or even controversial theory. People have been calling out the link between Wikileaks and Russia for a really long time.

"WikiLeaks, an organization purportedly devoted to transparency, is at a minimum okay with helping out the world’s most aggressively authoritarian leader."

http://www.vox.com/world/2017/1/6/141792…

@16, *citations needed

Also, wikileaks =/= snowden, or even manning for that matter. They all acted on their own motives, and while I think Snowden and Manning are heroes who put their own asses on the line for the greater good, it seems to me that Assange exploited Manning for his own personal interests. Manning was acting on a humanitarian impulse, while Assange just wants to bring harm to the US.
32
Red once meant "commie"
Now it means "republican"
I am so confused
33
@7: I know that warehouse. It's adjacent to the endless warehouse of straw-righties.
34
@26 I know I'll probably be ignored, but please, please read Masha Gessen's essay in the New York Review of Books:

Russia: The Conspiracy Trap
35
@26, no one's shedding tears for you, and it's illustrative of your ego that you not only respond to comments, but you link to two other of your articles.
36
Wait, isn't ignoring criticism a sign of overblown ego? Posting volumes of text that repeats what you already wrote, isn't that ego too? Hard for Charles to win this game you've got.
37
But this is really a far stretch from the "wiretapping Trump Tower claim", now we're at "the CIA has smartphone exploits", which of course they do, and to no rational person does that speak to Trump's claim.

The Fox writer would have picked up anything to distract. And it only speaks to Fox viewers, who don't need anything from WikiLeaks because they believe Trump's claim already anyway.
38
Good Morning Charles,
For good reason, this WikiLeaks dump doesn't alarm me. As the late film director Preston Surges once remarked "Privacy isn't dead, it's decomposed". I genuinely believe anyone (from Trump, Obama et al) can be spied on and any computer server be hacked. The key is to minimize it, the espionage.

There are darn good reasons I choose not to possess a cell phone/iPhone, smart TV/cable TV & a car. I'm now off of Facebook & never subscribed to Twitter.

However, I do have a credit card, Drivers' License & a computer. That said, I fully realize I can be watched and heard. But, I'm just dull enough for those that might that doing so would elicit a yawn.

I seriously doubt these leaks from the CIA via WikiLeaks (which you, yourself acknowledge could be baloney) will implicate Trump, the Russians (Putin et al) and 2016 Presidential Election.

Clinton lost. And as former VP Joe Biden said "It's over. Get over it".

39
Okay, here's the deal:

Someone from the White House security team (any or all agencies) brought Trump a recording.
This recording features Trump speaking with a Russian agent/operative/spy.
Trump assumed his "wires were tapped" by the former administration.
In fact, the agent/operative/spy Trump spoke with was the one being surveiled, not Trump.

Like I tell my mother when she asks why I don't call more often:
"A telephone works two ways..."

Trump is too stupid to realize that he has inadvertently admitted that he has been in contact with Russian agents/operatives/spies.
Sad!
☎🕵🚔
40
Don't you love these guys who stare at this Russia scandal and think it's a liberal fantasy? Remember when people who supposedly couldn't stand liberals at least waved the flag a little and tried to throw some patriotic slogans around when they could.

Now they just get talking points from RT and Sputnik and, workmanlike, desultory, they bang them out on the twitter and the forums. Quota ain't going to fill itself.

Remember when Assange said that there was no need to leak Russian secrets? None! Because so much good government there! If the need ever arises, sure, WikiLeaks will get right on it. But Russia's all good, every since...

...since WikiLeaks got coopted. It's all volunteer after all, loosely organized. A few people working for...? For someone moved in and took control. And then we got the WikiLeaks that protested that the Panama Papers were wrong! Unethical! Below WikiLeaks sterling standards of Decency. And embarrassing to Putin's cronies.

So yeah. Keep tooting that horn. How's that working out? Who's buying it? Yeah, that's what I thought. Lulz
41
I have an alternate theory, Charles. The information did not come from the FSB. It came from Trump himself.

Breitbart et al have been pushing this idea of the Deep State being at war with the POTUS. Trump himself whines constantly about leaks, which he suggests originate with the intelligence agencies. Ben Cardin went on Face the Nation some time ago to suggest that picking a fight with the intelligence agencies is the dumbest thing a POTUS can do, since they can get back at you "seven ways to Sunday".

If this running conflict is real, an impulsive person such as Trump could see this as a way to neuter those same agencies. Not only does this data dump render existing tools useless, it also opens the door to a Church Committee style investigation into domestic spying. The last time that happened, the Agency was set back on its heels for decades.

However, it should be noted that, despite the cliche, Cardin is right. I'm reminded of Gibbon;s Decline and Fall. The Year of the Four Emperors happened as a result of the power concentrated in the hands of the Praetorian Guard, the personal bodyguards of the Emperor. Three Emperors rose to power, each trying to reign in the Praetorian Guard and remove its power. Each one was assassinated in turn. The fourth was smarter, and just threw money at the Guard. Thats why it wasn't the Year of Five Emperors (that happened later).

This not being Rome, I don't think they would move so fatally. However, they could, to borrow a phrase "lock him up".