An Important Reminder
Julian Assange, who was once considered a darling of the Left – as long as his organization’s leaks primarily embarrassed the Bush administration over its insane Iraq war that is – has in the meantime advanced to the status of walking, talking assassination target for Hillary Clinton’s drones. He should probably be extra careful if she becomes president, because nothing and no-one will be able to hold her back anymore.
In the cross-hairs: Julian Assange
Image via truepundit.com
Back when she was secretary of state, Ms. Clinton once inquired of her aides whether killing Assange with a drone strike in order to silence Wikileaks would be a viable option. Several of those present at the meeting later related that they were not quite sure whether she was joking or not, because it didn’t sound like a joke to them (it probably wasn’t).
Ms. Clinton herself naturally “cannot recall” ever having said it, and if she did, well, then it was of course only in jest. Hahaha! (She is known for her tasteless jokes about the brutal deaths of other human beings. She evidently has as much empathy as a psychopath). Ms. Clinton reportedly has severe memory problems. When interviewed by the FBI, she apparently answered the questions of investigators with “I can’t recall” 39 times all in all.
When asked to explains why her memory was so extraordinarily poor, she stated that she had fallen on her head (this is true) and that she had suffered problems with her memory ever since. FBI agents thereupon wanted to review her health records. Alas, their chief Mr. Comey informed them that they were not allowed to do that. So they had to take her word for it.
In spite of her severe memory problems, Ms. Clinton somehow still managed to pen a memoir (yes, the two words have the same root).
Cartoon by Gary Varvel
We are just relating these things to remind readers of what a Clinton presidency actually means. Here you have someone who is either a consummate liar, or has some sort of brain damage. There is no third option. The brain damage may or may not be serious, but keep in mind that this person may soon be in control of the nuclear codes. Which she presumably won’t be able to recall if push ever comes to shove.
But who knows what else that hit on the head did to her? We may get an opportunity to find out, as early election returns indicate that the exceedingly odd alliance between the US oligarchy and the free shit army incarnated in Ms. Clinton will succeed in getting her elected.
As Stefan Molyneux notes in the video below, anyone who has read the emails released by Wikileaks in recent weeks no longer has an ethical or moral argument for giving her his vote. According to surveys, 83% of Americans believe she did either something illegal or unethical (the remaining 17% seem to be low information persons).
Amen to that.
Cartoon by Michael Ramirez
So why would one vote for someone like that? The answer can only be that she promised free shit to some people, which she will forcibly take from others on their behalf. Even if one dislikes Trump – and we can understand why some people may not be overly enamored of him – one can still decide to either vote for a third party candidate or no-one at all. This may not stop Clinton, but at least one’s conscience will be clear.
Stefan Molyneux explains why a Hillary Clinton victory will be really bad for Western civilization
Julian Assange Comments on Wikileaks and the Election
This brings us back to Julian Assange. The Clinton campaign has – quite successfully – turned the focus on the so far still completely unproven allegation that Wikileaks gets its information on the inner Clinton circle’s emails from Russia. But even if that were true (it probably isn’t), why would that even matter?
To our mind what matters is that the hitherto only suspected depth of corruption at the Clinton Foundation, within Clinton’s campaign and among certain mainstream media has been confirmed in black and white. Attempts to discredit the content of the emails have been halfhearted and have largely fallen flat – mainly because the mails are genuine.
You can look at a list of the most interesting examples here. Much of this is truly stomach-turning stuff. And yet, Ms. Clinton is on the verge of becoming US president. These revelations won’t go away though – if anything, their relevance will increase from here on out.
Help definitely did manage to arrive, in spades – and from the most curious sources.
Cartoon by: Henry Payne
Mr. Assange has released a statement on the matter ahead of the election today, which we reproduce below:
In recent months, WikiLeaks and I personally have come under enormous pressure to stop publishing what the Clinton campaign says about itself to itself. That pressure has come from the campaign’s allies, including the Obama administration, and from liberals who are anxious about who will be elected US President. On the eve of the election, it is important to restate why we have published what we have.
The right to receive and impart true information is the guiding principle of WikiLeaks – an organization that has a staff and organizational mission far beyond myself. Our organization defends the public’s right to be informed. This is why, irrespective of the outcome of the 2016 US Presidential election, the real victor is the US public which is better informed as a result of our work.
The US public has thoroughly engaged with WikiLeaks’ election related publications which number more than one hundred thousand documents. Millions of Americans have pored over the leaks and passed on their citations to each other and to us. It is an open model of journalism that gatekeepers are uncomfortable with, but which is perfectly harmonious with the First Amendment.
We publish material given to us if it is of political, diplomatic, historical or ethical importance and which has not been published elsewhere. When we have material that fulfills this criteria, we publish. We had information that fit our editorial criteria which related to the Sanders and Clinton campaign (DNC Leaks) and the Clinton political campaign and Foundation (Podesta Emails). No-one disputes the public importance of these publications. It would be unconscionable for WikiLeaks to withhold such an archive from the public during an election.
At the same time, we cannot publish what we do not have. To date, we have not received information on Donald Trump’s campaign, or Jill Stein’s campaign, or Gary Johnson’s campaign or any of the other candidates that fufills our stated editorial criteria. As a result of publishing Clinton’s cables and indexing her emails we are seen as domain experts on Clinton archives. So it is natural that Clinton sources come to us.
We publish as fast as our resources will allow and as fast as the public can absorb it.
That is our commitment to ourselves, to our sources, and to the public.
This is not due to a personal desire to influence the outcome of the election. The Democratic and Republican candidates have both expressed hostility towards whistleblowers. I spoke at the launch of the campaign for Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, because her platform addresses the need to protect them. This is an issue that is close to my heart because of the Obama administration’s inhuman and degrading treatment of one of our alleged sources, Chelsea Manning. But WikiLeaks publications are not an attempt to get Jill Stein elected or to take revenge over Ms Manning’s treatment either.
Publishing is what we do. To withhold the publication of such information until after the election would have been to favour one of the candidates above the public’s right to know.
This is after all what happened when the New York Times withheld evidence of illegal mass surveillance of the US population for a year until after the 2004 election, denying the public a critical understanding of the incumbent president George W Bush, which probably secured his reelection. The current editor of the New York Times has distanced himself from that decision and rightly so.
The US public defends free speech more passionately, but the First Amendment only truly lives through its repeated exercise. The First Amendment explicitly prevents the executive from attempting to restrict anyone’s ability to speak and publish freely. The First Amendment does not privilege old media, with its corporate advertisers and dependencies on incumbent power factions, over WikiLeaks’ model of scientific journalism or an individual’s decision to inform their friends on social media. The First Amendment unapologetically nurtures the democratization of knowledge. With the Internet, it has reached its full potential.
Yet, some weeks ago, in a tactic reminiscent of Senator McCarthy and the red scare, Wikileaks, Green Party candidate Stein, Glenn Greenwald and Clinton’s main opponent were painted with a broad, red brush. The Clinton campaign, when they were not spreading obvious untruths, pointed to unnamed sources or to speculative and vague statements from the intelligence community to suggest a nefarious allegiance with Russia. The campaign was unable to invoke evidence about our publications—because none exists.
In the end, those who have attempted to malign our groundbreaking work over the past four months seek to inhibit public understanding perhaps because it is embarrassing to them – a reason for censorship the First Amendment cannot tolerate. Only unsuccessfully do they try to claim that our publications are inaccurate.
WikiLeaks’ decade-long pristine record for authentication remains. Our key publications this round have even been proven through the cryptographic signatures of the companies they passed through, such as Google. It is not every day you can mathematically prove that your publications are perfect but this day is one of them.
We have endured intense criticism, primarily from Clinton supporters, for our publications. Many long-term supporters have been frustrated because we have not addressed this criticism in a systematic way or responded to a number of false narratives about Wikileaks’ motivation or sources. Ultimately, however, if WL reacted to every false claim, we would have to divert resources from our primary work.
WikiLeaks, like all publishers, is ultimately accountable to its funders. Those funders are you. Our resources are entirely made up of contributions from the public and our book sales. This allows us to be principled, independent and free in a way no other influential media organization is. But it also means that we do not have the resources of CNN, MSNBC or the Clinton campaign to constantly rebuff criticism. Yet if the press obeys considerations above informing the public, we are no longer talking about a free press, and we are no longer talking about an informed public.
Wikileaks remains committed to publishing information that informs the public, even if many, especially those in power, would prefer not to see it. WikiLeaks must publish. It must publish and be damned.
– Julian Assange
Hopefully Wikileaks will continue to do what it is doing so well. We certainly need these occasional glimpses into the inner workings of the corrupt system erected by the ruling elite. Let us hope that Mr. Assange will be able to continue to dodge the drones (and we say this only half in jest).
Photo credit: Eric Gay / AP
People who continue to think in political categories such as “left and right” have not yet understood that this is no longer what it is about. The battle lines have shifted quite some time ago already. This is not to say that no such ideological divide exists in principle – it just doesn’t exist in our current systemic reality. Left or right, they are all wedded to statism and social engineering and are unanimous in their support of the welfare-warfare state.
The middle class is hollowed out and destroyed by a semi-feudal political and economic oligarchy, the central planning bureaucrats acting on its behalf and a legal system evidently in thrall to it. What they call themselves is irrelevant. The left-right divide is a detraction, it has simply become part of a divide and rule strategy. In many ways this system has become inimical to personal liberty, free markets and peace. So what can be done about it?
One has to be realistic about the situation. Changing the system from within is probably impossible. We would hate to see Clinton winning, but we are not sure what a Trump presidency would ultimately be able to accomplish. The political power of presidents should not be overestimated; they are gone after eight years, but the “system” remains. So one can only act with respect to those things one actually has under control. We plan to discuss this point in more detail in a follow-up post.
If you should ever find yourself in a similar situation, always remember: Quod licet Iovi, not licet bovi.
Cartoon by Catalino
You may have noticed that our so-called “semiannual” funding drive, which started sometime in the summer if memory serves, has seamlessly segued into the winter. In fact, the year is almost over! We assure you this is not merely evidence of our chutzpa; rather, it is indicative of the fact that ad income still needs to be supplemented in order to support upkeep of the site. Naturally, the traditional benefits that can be spontaneously triggered by donations to this site remain operative regardless of the season - ranging from a boost to general well-being/happiness (inter alia featuring improved sleep & appetite), children including you in their songs, up to the likely allotment of privileges in the afterlife, etc., etc., but the Christmas season is probably an especially propitious time to cross our palms with silver. A special thank you to all readers who have already chipped in, your generosity is greatly appreciated. Regardless of that, we are honored by everybody's readership and hope we have managed to add a little value to your life.
Bitcoin address: 1DRkVzUmkGaz9xAP81us86zzxh5VMEhNke
2 Responses to “Assange vs. Clinton”
Most read in the last 20 days:
- Gold - Ready to Spring Another Surprise
Sentiment Extremes Below is an update of a number of interesting data points related to the gold market. Whether “interesting” will become “meaningful” remains to be seen, as most of gold's fundamental drivers aren't yet bullishly aligned. One must keep in mind though that gold is very sensitive with respect to anticipating future developments in market liquidity and the reaction these will elicit from central banks. Often this involves very long lead times. Blackbeard's...
- Modi’s Great Leap Forward
India’s Currency Ban – Part VIII India’s Prime Minister, Narendra Modi, announced on 8th November 2016 that Rs 500 (~$7.50) and Rs 1,000 (~$15) banknotes would no longer be legal tender. Linked are Part-I, Part-II, Part-III, Part-IV, Part-V, Part-VI and Part-VII, which provide updates on the demonetization saga and how Modi is acting as a catalyst to hasten the rapid degradation of India and what remains of its institutions. India’s Pride and Joy Indians are...
- Global Recession and Other Visions for 2017
Conjuring Up Visions Today’s a day for considering new hopes, new dreams, and new hallucinations. The New Year is here, after all. Now is the time to turn over a new leaf and start afresh. Naturally, 2017 will be the year you get exactly what’s coming to you. Both good and bad. But what else will happen? Image of a recently discarded vision... Image by Michael Del Mundo Here we begin by closing our eyes and slowing our breath. We let our mind...
- The Great El Monte Public Pension Swindle
Nowhere City California There are places in Southern California where, although the sun always shines, they haven’t seen a ray of light for over 50-years. There’s a no man’s land of urban blight along Interstate 10, from East Los Angeles through the San Gabriel Valley, where cities you’ve never heard of and would never go to, are jumbled together like shipping containers on Terminal Island. El Monte, California, is one of those places. Advice dispensed on Interstate...
- A Trade Deal Trump Cannot Improve
Worst in Class BALTIMORE – People can believe whatever they want. But sooner or later, real life intervenes. We just like to see the looks on their faces when it does. By that measure, 2017 may be our best year ever. Rarely have so many people believed so many impossible things. Alice laughed. "There's no use trying," she said: "one can't believe impossible things." "I daresay you haven't had much practice," said the Queen. "When I was your age, I always did it for...
- Pope Francis Now International Monetary Guru
Neo-Marxist Pope Francis Argues for Global Central Bank As the new year dawns, it seems the current occupant of St. Peter’s Chair will take on a new function which is outside the purview of the office that the Divine Founder of his institution had clearly mandated. Neo-Papist transmogrification. We highly recommend the economic thought of one of Francis' storied predecessors, John Paul II, which we have written about on previous occasions. In “A Tale of Two Popes” and...
- Trump’s Trade Catastrophe?
“Trade Cheaters” It is worse than “voodoo economics,” says former Treasury Secretary Larry Summers. It is the “economic equivalent of creationism.” Wait a minute - Larry Summers is wrong about almost everything. Could he be right about this? Larry Summers, the man who is usually wrong about almost everything. As we have always argued, the economy is much safer when he sleeps, so his tendency to fall asleep on all sorts of occasions should definitely be welcomed....
- Where’s the Outrage?
Blind to Crony Socialism Whenever a failed CEO is fired with a cushy payoff, the outrage is swift and voluminous. The liberal press usually misrepresents this as a hypocritical “jobs for the boys” program within the capitalist class. In reality, the payoffs are almost always contractual obligations, often for deferred compensation, that the companies vigorously try to avoid. Believe me. I’ve been on both sides of this kind of dispute (except, of course, for the “failed”...
- Money Creation and the Boom-Bust Cycle
A Difference of Opinions In his various writings, Murray Rothbard argued that in a free market economy that operates on a gold standard, the creation of credit that is not fully backed up by gold (fractional-reserve banking) sets in motion the menace of the boom-bust cycle. In his The Case for 100 Percent Gold Dollar Rothbard wrote: I therefore advocate as the soundest monetary system and the only one fully compatible with the free market and with the absence of force or fraud...
- Silver’s Got Fundamentals - Precious Metals Supply-Demand Report
Supply-Demand Fundamentals Improve Noticeably Last week was another short week, due to the New Year holiday. We look forward to getting back to our regularly scheduled market action. Photo via thedailycoin.org The prices of both metals moved up again this week. Something very noticeable is occurring in the supply and demand fundamentals. We will give an update on that, but first, here’s the graph of the metals’ prices. Prices of gold and silver...
- Trump’s Plan to Close the Trade Deficit with China
Rags to Riches Jack Ma is an amiable fellow. Back in 1994, while visiting the United States he decided to give that newfangled internet thing a whirl. At a moment of peak inspiration, he executed his first search engine request by typing in the word beer. Jack Ma, founder and CEO of Alibaba, China's largest e-commerce firm. Once he was a school teacher, but it turned out that he had enormous entrepreneurial talent and that the world of wheelers, dealers, movers and...
- Side Notes, January 14 - Red Flags Over Goldman Sachs
Red Flags Over Goldman Sachs Just to prove that I am an even-handed insulter, here is a rant about my former employer, Goldman Sachs. The scandal at 1MDB, the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund from which it appears that billions were stolen by politicians all the way up to the Prime Minister, continues to unfold. The main players in the 1MDB scandal. Irony alert: apparently money siphoned off from 1MDB was used to inter alia finance Martin Scorcese's movie “The Wolf of...