Julian Assange Interview Sean Hannity in London 1/3/17

[jaded]

I like Assange & more importantly what he represents, but how would he know if Russians did or didn't hack any specific thing or not? I mean clearly someone hacked the DNC. They didn't f#cking hack themselves & leak info that would make them look corrupt & like *******s. So someone did it. Why not Russian hackers?

Or if he's saying it didn't influence the election how the f#ck would anyone even know that? I don't know how you'd even prove that enough people heard the DNC stuff & decided to take it out on Hillary or not take it out on Hillary in all the states to affect the election.

Didn't watch the video so maybe I'm missing something in the headline here so feel free to correct me if I'm mistaken on Assange's take on this.

Watch the video 1st. Assange was an IT Security Specialist and when he was young he hacked into the Pentagon and US Department of Defense. He knows what he is talking about when he talks about hacking. But specifically...he knows his source for the leaks which he won't reveal because he protects his sources....and said it has nothing to do with Russia.

[AllBoxingAD]

Not an example of dishonesty, nor sourced.

Try again.



Same as above.

Try again.


FYI, you don't get to define 'dishonesty' to fit your stance here. You have to provide examples of dishonesty.

Let me cite a few examples (which I'll source if asked):

1. NBC hid igniters under GM trucks to make it appear they had a design defect causing them to explode in crashes. NBC settled out of court with GM

2. Dan Rather accepted anonymous faxes from Kinko's done in MS Word as legit 1960s-era docs to try and say Bush lied about his 1960s military service. Rather was fired (or demoted) for his dishonesty.

Those are examples of press dishonesty. You need to cite something similar that Mr Hannity has done.

Good luck with that!

1st im not gonna source ****, i dont know if the videos i mentioned are even online. You asked for examples, not proof, and i provided examples. If you wanna say that what i mentionned never happened you can certainly do your research and prove me wrong.

2nd i most certainly can define dishonesty. If i was a guest invited on his show to discuss a specific topic and when i got there he only wanted to talk about something completly unrelated, i would feel as though i was lied to. Therefore as a viewer i can say that he is a dishonest tv host.

3rd like i said, i know that Hannity is an ideologue. I dont begrudge him that. The reason why people hate him is because he is over the top with it, to the point of being cartoonish. Hannity had an entire segment dedicated to what ***** puts in his hamburger that proves that he is anti-American (dijon instead of ketchup, for example).

[jaded]

[1bad65]

1st im not gonna source ****, i dont know if the videos i mentioned are even online.

So you have no proof whatsoever.

Got it.

Next....

If you wanna say that what i mentionned never happened you can certainly do your research and prove me wrong.

The onus to prove an assertion falls upon the person making it. The concept is called the Philosophic Burden of Proof.

Do you need me to teach that to you?

Just ask. I'll be glad to. After all, knowledge is the only cure for ignorance.

[SterlingStained]

i believe julian assange.

wikileaks = batting 1000%.

they have never had to offer a correction/apology for any of their leaks.

fake **** charge was done at the behest of the CIA.

this is what intelligence services do when they want to destroy someone's credibility...

basic stagecraft 101....
basic black arts 101....

[BERNIE'S CORNER]

No green eggs and spam 4 me thank you....

[jaded]

Hannity aired another 5 mins of the interview tonight. There is in total an additional 40 mins besides the original part 1 interview...I'm not sure how much of it he will air. I will update if more is released of it.

[SterlingStained]

i believe assange.

as soon as that **** charge went public when he started releasing leaks, i knew right off the bat that was a CIA directed attempt to destroy the messenger's credibility thus the leaks....

the guy is batting 1000%.

i dont know why people think he's lying.

his record speaks for itself.

he has never had to offer a correction/apology for his leaks... just think about how long this guy has been messing with first world superpowers...

you would think by now if he was a fraud, the western intelligence services would have found a way to destroy his credibility.

the fact that they havent tells me assange is the real deal.

[Money Shot]

Pretty clear that third parties passed the hacked data to Assange, or state actors as the Senate Committee heard today. Assange claiming it wasn't Russia is him sucking orange ****.