WikiLeaks' DNC publication (July 22, 2016) was also publicly promoted for over a month before hand, from June 12 onwards.pic.twitter.com/4vpQ67GB29
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Cohen has no credibility. Free Assange!
-
Assange has credibility?
-
I don’t believe Wikileaks/Assange have ever had to issue a retraction or correction. They release primary documents. What’s in those documents is literal straight from the source.
-
That's irrelevant.
-
It means they are 100% credible and accurate. Logic.
-
Nor does it mean that Assagne is personally a credible person.
-
-
Someone who has SELECTIVELY leaked ONLY the parts he wants to leak isn't credible. If you only tell half the truth, you can tell a lie.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
1)
@Wikileaks has 12 yr, uncontested 100% document accuracy record.Won every single court case challenging this! 2)@Wikileaks/ its editors/journalists hold numerous global awards for courageous, truthful important, journalism. 3) No amount of smearing alters the above 2 facts -
100% document accuracy maybe 100% accuracy on anything else? Not even close. Maybe you forgot that 8 years and 2 weeks ago, expert witnesses hired by your son testified that wikileaks lies to THEM, and his lawyer admitted they lied to the public about his leaving SWE.
-
You are misinformed. Much media misinfo/ smear re US war ally Sweden's false (now dropped) allegations against
@Wikileaks editor Julian Assange Designed to detain him WITHOUT charge for 8 + yrs! ALL Facts/court docs/background/context here: http://justice4assange.com#auspol -
I am NOT misinformed. Did they never show you the court records? Read for yourself. http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2011/5.html … Experts used your linked resource for facts, embarrassed in court when shown the actual evidence and facts. He's your son, I get it, but pushing lies does you no favours.
-
also, 'all facts'? Hardly! It calls the UN opinion a judgement/ruling (its not) It goes on about a nearly 9 year grand jury - the record is I think 5 years. says SWE considered it 'disproportionate to proceed', actually said they couldn't proceed [by arresting] ...and so on
-
I also like how he has been “detained” for 8+ years, pretty sure that’s by choice, if he did nothing wrong he could’ve faced his charges and moved on with his life, if in fact he was innocent but something tells me Julian doesn’t have an innocent bone in his body
-
I mean, poor Ronnie biggs 'detained' in Brazil for 36 years! It parallels, was also a situation with extradition prohibited from being carried out meaning he was free, but 'detained' (in JulianSpeak)
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Don't try to confuse Democrats with fact's.
-
Although, we might get confused by randomly placed apostrophes.
-
Haha
-
The facts have been owned?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.