[resters]

If you were Assange and you were trying to convince Trump Jr to hand over documents to you, would you pretend to be indifferent about the outcome of the election?

Assange wants to help reveal any secret information that will help fix the many problems stemming from secrecy and corruption of governments and institutions. Every one of his actions have supported that mission.

The focus on Assange's alleged political views and his personal life are an attempt to "shoot the messenger". We should really be 99% concerned with the information that was leaked and at most 1% concerned with anything about Assange's personality.

[kej]

WikiLeaks sat on Manafort's group sex and blood money texts, but released Podesta's emails less than an hour after the Access Hollywood tape was published. His agenda was more than an act to get on Don Jr.'s good side.

[boomboomsubban]

>WikiLeaks sat on...

Source for them "sitting on" time sensitive material?

[malvosenior]

Podesta’s emails had proof of the Clinton campaign colluding with the media. You can not compare that with details of Manafort’s private life.

It’s clear why one would be in the public’s interest to learn about and the other is just gossip.

[oxide]

Wikileaks is no arbiter of what is and what is not relevant to the interest of the public.

If they choose to sit on information, they have an agenda, IMO.

[malvosenior]

It doesn’t matter if they have an agenda (which has definitely not been proven). It’s good that they get any information to the public. The Podesta emails were extremely valuable to the public, they had a right to know that the DNC was in bed with the media. Whatever else didn’t get leaked doesn’t matter. That info needed to be made public.