(or better: do you have a link?)
I'm confused, isn't the (((3 brackets))) a white supremacist thing for identifying Jewish people?
Given that half of the establishment is hell bent on finding evidence of a Trump/Russia conspiracy theory, whether it exists or not, Wikileaks isn't really a necessary part of the process. If there is something, somebody will share it.
But yet they need to offer a 20k GBP reward for inside info on British Labour? I thought “if there is something, somebody will share it”?
Which one of them would you share your secrets with?
Contrast that with the Washington Post, which would wet its collective pants if you found anything on Trump, no matter how minor, and would probably offer a large reward. The NYTimes clearly hates him too. You're spoiled for choice.
And not a single media mention, the entire change in perception was either through Wikileaks’ actions and words, entirely through reading mostly their own Twitter.
Edit, found it:
Some of the reasons why I don't like WikiLeaks:
1. Their cooperation with Roger Stone: "Well, it could be any number of things. I actually have communicated with Assange. I believe the next tranche of his documents pertain to the Clinton Foundation but there’s no telling what the October surprise may be."
2. "Most of Wikileaks' critics have 3 (((brackets around their names))) & have black-rim glasses. Bizarre. Tribalist symbol for establishment climbers?"
3. Fueling the whole utterly bizarre 'spirit cooking' thing. The world's most pre-eminent performance artist invites the brother of the campaign manager of a presidential candidate for dinner? I'm sure that the degrees of separation to fucking Trump are shorter than that, but no, Hillary is literally the devil. And the whole 'election is rigged' thing with "Trump won't be allowed to win the election"
4. Calling out the Clinton Foundation for receiving money from Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is one of the world's wealthiest countries, and the Clinton Foundation is one of the world's more pre-eminent charities. They have many other donors and Saudi money goes many other places. And the Saudi royal family numbers in the tens of thousands. Sure, some of them will be involved with ISIS. But seriously.
5. "WikiLeaks offers award for #LabourLeaks. Wikileaks offers £20,000 reward for #LabourLeaks with information on how the Labour Party’s top officials have attempted to stop Jeremy Corbyn becoming and staying on as leader." Any chance of a reward for information pertaining to Trump or Russia? I didn't think so.
6. The RT/WikiLeaks connection
7. Leaking Clinton library records. The chilling effect here is insane.
8. Hitchens, back in 2010: "The WikiLeaks founder is an unscrupulous megalomaniac with a political agenda."
Almost entirely WikiLeaks themselves, posted before the election of Trump even, no colouring in of my opinion by the lamestream media.