Wazula42

This directly contradicts Assange.

Assange has said that wikileaks received information on the Trump campaign but declined to post it because they didn't think people would find it interesting.

As an Amercain whose livelihood is being threatened by this new administration, I would like to know why Wikileaks is suddenly the arbiter of what I can and cannot know about my presidential candidates.

Assange's direct quote:

“We do have some information about the Republican campaign,” he said Friday, according to The Washington Post.

“I mean, it’s from a point of view of an investigative journalist organization like WikiLeaks, the problem with the Trump campaign is it’s actually hard for us to publish much more controversial material than what comes out of Donald Trump’s mouth every second day," Assange said.

We were not publishing with a goal to get any specific candidate elected.

How do you reconcile this with the fact that you sold Bill Clinton "Dicking Bimbos" t-shirts on your website?

Also, Assange has stated you declined to publish information on Trump because it wasn't interesting enough.

Both of these seem to reveal your organization as partisan against the Clintons. I never saw a "grab them by the pussy" shirt on your website. Would you care to comment?

Assange has stated that wikileaks declined to post any of the data they have on Trump since they didn't feel it was relevant to the interests of the American people. This runs counter to wikileaks' position that they will be a non-partisan source for whistleblowers of all stripes to post their information, and that wikileaks will allow the people to decide what is or is not important?

How do you reconcile this? Will wikileaks continue to withhold information if they feel it is unnecessary for people to see it?

Everyone identifies with McNulty or Omar, when in reality most of us are more like Valchek or Rawls. We're happier to see these problems swept under the rug.

Dude. Don't embarrass him in from of Ethan Hawke.