He lost a lot of good will in 2016 by having access to internal documents from both parties, but only releasing them from one. Or at least, appearing to have done so.
1) I've not seen credible evidence that he retained internal documents from the Republicans, only releasing material from the Democrats. Do you have any citations for this?
2) Regardless of the above, that's still a fairly parochial perspective. The rest of the world doesn't revolve around internal US politics.
The Secret Correspondence Between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks
The Wikileaks Twitter account asked Trump Jr. to leak some material to them, at a time when Assange's Internet had been cut. That isn't interesting, searching for information to release is what journalists do.
WIKILEAKS DISCUSSES PREFERENCE FOR GOP OVER CLINTON
The same Clinton that said "why don't we just drone [Assange]?" That isn't very surprising.
WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign
This refers to documents submitted to Wikileaks right at the time they were dealing with one of the biggest releases in their history. The organisation was stretched but deemed the leaks of little relevance, anyway. (I believe a large part of these documents was already published).
Whoever submitted this material to Wikileaks then immediately got in touch with media orgs who simultaneously released articles about how Wikileaks rejected Russian leaks. Did these articles specify the nature of the rejected leaks, or perhaps even organise to publish themselves (even in part)? Ha.
I believe the leaks were published somewhere later and nobody cared because they were not interesting.
The claim that Wikileaks had access to equivalent Trump documents in 2016 has never been substantiated, to any degree. People sometimes point to Assange's comment that (paraphrasing) "Trump is a funny issue because any information we had would pale in comparison to what he says every day", but that was not an admission that Wikileaks had any interesting documents relating to Trump.
Also, the Wikileaks Twitter account contacted Trump Jr. directly to ask them to leak Trump's tax returns, and this fact was later used to attack Wikileaks. Why would they have taken this risk if they already had information on Trump?
Comments
He lost a lot of good will in 2016 by having access to internal documents from both parties, but only releasing them from one. Or at least, appearing to have done so.
A couple of points, if I may.
1) I've not seen credible evidence that he retained internal documents from the Republicans, only releasing material from the Democrats. Do you have any citations for this?
2) Regardless of the above, that's still a fairly parochial perspective. The rest of the world doesn't revolve around internal US politics.
Ironically, the most credible evidence is leaks of internal wikileaks communications:
The Secret Correspondence Between Donald Trump Jr. and WikiLeaks https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/the-sec...
IN LEAKED CHATS, WIKILEAKS DISCUSSES PREFERENCE FOR GOP OVER CLINTON, RUSSIA, TROLLING, AND FEMINISTS THEY DON’T LIKE https://theintercept.com/2018/02/14/julian-assange-wikileaks...
WikiLeaks Turned Down Leaks on Russian Government During U.S. Presidential Campaign https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l...
The Wikileaks Twitter account asked Trump Jr. to leak some material to them, at a time when Assange's Internet had been cut. That isn't interesting, searching for information to release is what journalists do.
The same Clinton that said "why don't we just drone [Assange]?" That isn't very surprising.
This refers to documents submitted to Wikileaks right at the time they were dealing with one of the biggest releases in their history. The organisation was stretched but deemed the leaks of little relevance, anyway. (I believe a large part of these documents was already published).
Whoever submitted this material to Wikileaks then immediately got in touch with media orgs who simultaneously released articles about how Wikileaks rejected Russian leaks. Did these articles specify the nature of the rejected leaks, or perhaps even organise to publish themselves (even in part)? Ha.
I believe the leaks were published somewhere later and nobody cared because they were not interesting.
The claim that Wikileaks had access to equivalent Trump documents in 2016 has never been substantiated, to any degree. People sometimes point to Assange's comment that (paraphrasing) "Trump is a funny issue because any information we had would pale in comparison to what he says every day", but that was not an admission that Wikileaks had any interesting documents relating to Trump.
Also, the Wikileaks Twitter account contacted Trump Jr. directly to ask them to leak Trump's tax returns, and this fact was later used to attack Wikileaks. Why would they have taken this risk if they already had information on Trump?