Thanks for printing! Don't forget to come back to Herman Cain for fresh articles!
Julian Assange: Oh, there are lots more hacked Hillary e-mails coming
Expect batches . . . and batches . . . and batches . . .
I'm starting to think that maybe the Trump campaign and the RNC should just take a seat, shut their mouths and let Julian Assange do his thing. The only way to keep Hillary from becoming president is convince the larger electorate what some of us already know - that she is an evil, corrupt, self-serving liar who also happens to be completely incompetent and far more ill-tempered than Trump, despite what you've been led to believe.
Some people already understand this, but astonishingly, many do not. For those in the latter category, they're not going to become convinced by Trump saying so. The mainstream media are not going to tell them about it. But if they read Hillary's own words - not the ones she scripts for convention speeches but the ones she perpetrates when she thinks the public won't hear her - that might be the one remaining chance to help people understand just what kind of person they're about to hand power to.
And it appears the one person who can make that happen is WikiLeaks founder Assange, who typically doesn't bluff, and says he's got lots more Hillary e-mails that he plans to plans to release in batches between now and the election:
Assange refused to say whether Russia was behind the hack that dug up the material that ended up in the hands of Wikileaks.
'Well, what sort of question is that? I am a journalist – we don't reveal our sources,' he lectured host Poppy Harlow..
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange says his group has 'quite a lot' of material on Hillary Clinton's campaign, and is in the process of reviewing it for dissemination
Asked whether his group was being used to manipulate the U.S. politics, he continued: 'So what is the accusation here precisely? No one disputes even a single email that we have published ... The goal of Wikileaks as a media organization is to educate the public, to turn a dark world into a lighter world through the process of education. And we're doing it.'
He indicated his team was reviewing the material for proper presentation and has already verified its accuracy.
Assange seized the attention of the political world once again Friday when he told CNN, 'We have more material related to the Hillary Clinton campaign.'
Assange hinted that the material was 'extremely interesting,' and said cryptically: 'We will see what will come of them in due course.'
Honesty is my practice, but I'm going to take it to a whole new level today. Assange strikes me as a shady character. I am not really the biggest fan of just hacking people's information and releasing it to the public. I think that's how you take down a lot of good people who meant no harm by what they did behind the scenes, and it could also be a way that you jeopardize national security. If the players were different - and in the future they very well may be - I expect I would be a harsh critic of what Assange does.
But in this case, I don't care. Or at least I don't care enough to feel compelled to take some "principled stand" for the sake of consistency. However shady Assange may be, he is a boy scout compared to Hillary, who seeks far more power than Assange ever will. His tactics are questionable, but they're the picture of political and professional ethics compared to hers, which are rotten in every conceivable way.
So if you want to call me inconsistent because I would hate to see Assange doing this to a candidate I liked, know what? You're right. And I don't care. Preventing Hillary Clinton from acquiring the kind of power she seeks is too important for me to worry about my intellectual vanity. If Assange is the guy who can keep her out of the Oval Office, I'll not only cheer him on, I'll send him some money if he needs it.
By the way, I do like the way he handles the media in this interview - refusing to be trapped by questions about how he got the information, as if that's more important than the accuracy of the information itself, which he correctly points out is being questioned by no one.
But the key here is what's in those upcoming batches, and whether the content comes to be known by enough people to make a difference. One potential drawback of the release-it-in-waves strategy is that the releases lose their punch if there are too many of them. Remember the never-ending releases of the Planned Parenthood videos? They were all shocking, but after the first three or four (out of a total of 12), it was like, "Oh, another one of these."
You know damn well the MSM will try to ignore this, and will only cover it if it makes them look really bad to not do so. It's not Assange's style to accompany the dump with a press release or executive summary. He just puts the information out there and figures everyone can thumb through it for themselves. I suppose it will be up to the conservative alternative media and the RNC to really find the meat, because you know Hillary's defenders in the MSM will not do that.
The other question is whether there's anything we can learn about Hillary at this point that will matter. We already know she's corrupt and that she lies without any conscience whatsoever. We know she thinks the rules don't apply to her. We know she will say absolutely anything to get elected regardless of whether she means it or believes it.
And we know she's an unindicted criminal. Yet an awful lot of the American people - some of whom must at least know some of these - seem prepared to nevertheless hand her the keys to the Oval Office. If Assange has information that will get through to even those people, by all means, let's see it. We're getting periously close to the most disastrous mistake this country has ever made.