When WikiLeaks first became a known group, it was cheered by many as a whistle-blowing organization aimed at providing transparency. Though I’ve always been skeptical of groups that proclaim themselves to be the “watchers of corruption.” The question I always ask is: Well, who’s watching the “watchers”?
Take for instance the hacked information WikiLeaks has been publishing about Hillary Clinton, the DNC and people associated with her. Information that was obtained illegally, most likely from hackers backed by the Russian government.
At this point, you have to be woefully naive to not see that WikiLeaks has become nothing more than a political tool of the Russian government. This is the same group that threatened The Daily Dot after they published a report showing where the organization supposedly hid a $2.4 billion payment between Syria and a government-owned Russian bank.
Nothing like making threats against journalists doing to you what you claim you’re doing to others — reporting on questionable behavior. Especially behavior that appears to have deliberately hidden information the Russian government might not have wanted to be made public, as rumors continue to swirl that your organization is working with that very same Russian government.
Now we’ve had emails from the chairman of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, John Podesta, being released by this “benevolent advocacy group.” The timing of the release of these emails was clearly not by accident as they began being published just after the video came out with Trump admitting to being a sexual predator and boasting about grabbing women “by the p–sy.”
Funny how that works, huh?
If you can’t put the “2+2” together on that one, then you’re in complete denial.
Things got even more interesting when some noticed RT.com, a media entity controlled by the Russian government, published an article on one of the batches of emails being released before WikiLeaks had officially posted them. Both RT.com and WikiLeaks deny this — for reasons I think most rational people can figure out for themselves.
Nothing to see here folks, it’s all just a coincidence.
The most damning evidence in all of this, in my opinion, is a tweet longtime Trump ally Roger Stone sent out back in August where he mentioned Podesta, saying his time was coming “soon”:
Trust me, it will soon the Podesta's time in the barrel. #CrookedHillary
— Roger Stone (@RogerJStoneJr) August 21, 2016
So, let me get something straight.
Before anyone supposedly knew what WikiLeaks had, let alone specific emails linked to a specific account (Podesta’s), a close Trump confidant made a very public threat against Podesta — and we’re all supposed to believe that this is just a giant coincidence?
Stone literally said Podesta would be “in the barrel” just a few weeks before WikiLeaks began dumping emails from his account that no one knew they had.
Let’s break down what we’ve seen here so far:
- A GOP presidential candidate who’s praised Russia’s president, bashed NATO (which is something Russia loves hearing), employed a former campaign manager who was linked to pro-Russian groups trying to undermine U.S. policy in Europe and has continually tried to cast doubt that Russia is behind these recent hacks.
- WikiLeaks has been specifically releasing documents aimed at trying to hurt Hillary Clinton’s presidential chances.
- U.S. intelligence officials and agencies have specifically implicated Russia as being behind these illegal attacks on American citizens and organization.
- WikiLeaks began dumping massive batches of emails right after a damning video was released of Trump bragging about sexual assault and trying to have an affair with a married woman.
- A media entity controlled by the Russian government apparently covered a batch of emails before WikiLeaks publicly released the documents — though both deny this happened.
- A very close ally to Donald Trump sent out a tweet a few weeks ago saying that John Podesta would soon be “in the barrel” — the individual whose emails WikiLeaks began dumping just as Trump’s campaign was facing its largest controversy to date — even though there was technically no way Roger Stone should have known that WikiLeaks had Podesta’s emails.
Sure, there’s more evidence that would need to be discovered before any actual charges of treason could be levied against Donald Trump, members of his campaign or even Roger Stone.
Everything we’ve seen so far about all of this from the fact that only Democrats were targeted, to Trump’s strange and defiant praise of Vladimir Putin, to even Roger Stone seemingly warning John Podesta his time was coming just a few weeks before WikiLeaks dumped his emails (which magically occurred right as Trump was facing the most difficult day of his campaign) — it all seems to point to some sort of connection that links Trump’s campaign to deliberate attempts by WikiLeaks, by way of the Russian government, to influence our election to help him become our next president.
And we can’t forget when Trump publicly encouraged Russia to commit espionage against Americans and Stone has admitted that he has “back-channel communications with WikiLeaks.”
At what point do we need to start pushing more forcibly for these connections to be investigated?
While this all could be a string of huge coincidences, when you have a long-time ally to Donald Trump seemingly predicting the future release of documents that were apparently illegally hacked by the Russians attempting to influence an election, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to wonder if there’s been some coordination between Donald Trump’s campaign and pro-Russian agents.
So I absolutely think it’s fair to ask the questions, and investigate whether or not Russia and Trump’s campaign might be working together to help elect a president who, at times, could be putting the interests of the Russian government ahead of our own.