Did Bill Maher lie to Assange, viewers about $1 million Clinton donation?

[Kalis]

Theresa May should have got Virgin to cut internet access to the Ecuadorian Embassy.

[Kmids]

Maher is a fucking prick. I watched his show almost a decade ago when he was slightly less prickish. I don't honestly give a damn who he donates do. He's been a Hillary shrill since he started.

You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Maher was pro Sanders all the way to the end, and he is only supporting Clinton to avoid Trump, as are all people with any sense whatsoever.

[Zarc]

I like how Assange went from the coolest thing since sliced bread to utterly loathed overnight due to this DNC mess.

Actually, the "DNC mess" is only the latest nail in the coffin of cementing my suspicion that he as an agenda that is not about transparency and anti-corruption, which is why when I first learned of WikiLeaks and Assange I viewed them in a very positive light. Since then another picture has gradually formed around this man and his organization.

This is a man who was wanted on suspicions of rape in Sweden.

This is a man who started The WikiLeaks Party in Australia, one that called itself "libertarian".

This is a man who advised Edward Snowden to seek refuge in Russia.

This is a man who had his own talk show on Russia Today.

This is an organization that is getting hold of and publishing information primarily on Western society.

This is a man who back in 2010 announced that "the Kremlin had better brace itself for a coming wave of WikiLeaks disclosures about Russia", and a Russian newspaper said it would begin releasing materials in January 2011, with an eye towards exposing corruption in the Russian government. This material remains unpublished.

This is a man who is publishing leaked material from the DNC that would hurt the Democratic candidate for President in the US at a time when the Republican Party has an anti-NATO, pro-Putin, neoreactionary populist that is being championed by the trolls of the alt-right online and who has a flair for racist, sexist and conspiracy theorist comments while also showing a complete disregard for facts or common decency and who is open to limiting free press, committing what would be considered war crimes under international law, and who insinuates violence and imprisonments on journalists and political opponents and also seemingly seeking to break down trust in the entire democratic system of the United States. We all know Russia is among the most corrupt countries in the world. That Putin's personal net worth is along the lines of $200 billion dollars, and that the Russian oligarchs who surround him has accumulated even more wealth by abusing political power since the 1990's. Corruption in Russia is present from top to bottom in government and business. That some random DNC staffer suggested that they should give some journalist the idea to ask Sanders, a guy who just recently joined their political party, about his faith because he thought that would erode some support for him pales to insignificance compared to the fact that the Kremlin is controlling he entire narrative in Russian media, with opposition politicians and journalists being murdered and jailed on a regular basis. Why doesn't they target that? Why instead does he partner with the international arm of Russian state propaganda, Russia Today and backtracks on releasing disclosures about Russia? Meanwhile he shows no hesitation to aid the cause of Donald Trump, a man who is a threat to Western liberal democracy and the post-World War II security order, by releasing the DNC leaks. As diverse as their political views may be, and as much as you may dislike any of them, it is obvious that neither Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, John Kasich, Ted Cruz or Gary Johnson is a threat to Western liberal democracy. Frankly, though I digress from the topic, I would vote for either of those candidates before I voted for Donald Trump, and so should any sane person. I guess I am on the same page as Bill Maher on this one, I understand he supported Bernie over Hillary. (For the record I'd vote for Donald Trump before I voted for Adolf Hitler.)

Now what larger picture does that form around Assange? The alleged rape - which would require a certain mixture of testosterone and chemicals in the brain of a man, a brain that is also used to form ones political views - and the seemingly pro-Putin agenda coupled with the fact that he called his party "libertarian" paints the picture that he is probobly of the mindset of the neoreactionary Dark Enlightenment types of people of the alt-right, Donald Trump, UKIP and other right-wing populist and nationalist movements across the Western world. In fact, whenever I hear someone call themselves libertarian nowadays - without being affiliated with a party like the Libertarian Party which has a track record since the 70's of subscribing to the original meaning of libertarianism when it was more or less just a synonym for classical liberalism or being culturally liberal and fiscally conservative - I am suspicious that they are rather something closer to paleolibertarians, which basically combines conservative social philosophy and cultural values with a radical libertarian opposition to government intervention and who also for some reason aligns itself with the Kremlin, like UKIP. That makes me believe that Assange's anit-corruption and transparency exterior is only a means to an end that is at its core anti-democratic and reactionary and as such a danger to my individual liberty and to the entire free world.

[Acidbaron]

Bill Maher is a person that fits in and is needed in this political climate that resides in the US, ignorance luring out arrogance is nothing new either.

I'm failing to see the big fuzz about all of this, you guys think he isn't in support of Clinton, you think he isn't calling out things as he sees it? He has been doing that for ages.

I don't think Assange is tied up in politics enough to care about it either way, what he does care about is attention more importantly media attention, he is the largest attention whore on this globe and like the spotlight, so he released the information not with the intend to harm DNC and donators although he couldn't care less as everything is fair game as long he gets what he wants, something the other side was attacking him for before with him releasing other american government information.

He did knowing when he could get the most media attention to himself and his side. There's a reason a lot of the older crew just packed up and leave and it was not due to pressure from government put simply the style assange is maintaining regarding the website.

If you find it fair for assange to release whenever whatever you can't be a hypocrite and now display false outrage or disbelieve when Maher questions him on just exactly that, sadly again feeding into assange need for media attention. He's like gorefiend with souls in that regard.

I however don't put it beyond assange to be a russian puppet as he needs their political support and backing, and Russia is know for trying to influence other nations politics to create chaos that benefits them. They have been doing that since WW2 so you have to be a fool to believe otherwise.

edit: Like how he doesn't respond on the accusation of him, aiding Russia in a manner and goes directly to assaulting maher to deflect the question, guess we know the answer to that question.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Actually, the "DNC mess" is only the latest nail in the coffin of cementing my suspicion that he as an agenda that is not about transparency and anti-corruption, which is why when I first learned of WikiLeaks and Assange I viewed them in a very positive light. Since then another picture has gradually formed around this man and his organization.

This is a man who was wanted on suspicions of rape in Sweden.

This is a man who started The WikiLeaks Party in Australia, one that called itself "libertarian".

This is a man who advised Edward Snowden to seek refuge in Russia.

This is a man who had his own talk show on Russia Today.

This is an organization that is getting hold of and publishing information primarily on Western society.

This is a man who back in 2010 announced that "the Kremlin had better brace itself for a coming wave of WikiLeaks disclosures about Russia", and a Russian newspaper said it would begin releasing materials in January 2011, with an eye towards exposing corruption in the Russian government. This material remains unpublished.

This is a man who is publishing leaked material from the DNC that would hurt the Democratic candidate for President in the US at a time when the Republican Party has an anti-NATO, pro-Putin, neoreactionary populist that is being championed by the trolls of the alt-right online and who has a flair for racist, sexist and conspiracy theorist comments while also showing a complete disregard for facts or common decency and who is open to limiting free press, committing what would be considered war crimes under international law, and who insinuates violence and imprisonments on journalists and political opponents and also seemingly seeking to break down trust in the entire democratic system of the United States. We all know Russia is among the most corrupt countries in the world. That Putin's personal net worth is along the lines of $200 billion dollars, and that the Russian oligarchs who surround him has accumulated even more wealth by abusing political power since the 1990's. Corruption in Russia is present from top to bottom in government and business. That some random DNC staffer suggested that they should give some journalist the idea to ask Sanders, a guy who just recently joined their political party, about his faith because he thought that would erode some support for him pales to insignificance compared to the fact that the Kremlin is controlling he entire narrative in Russian media, with opposition politicians and journalists being murdered and jailed on a regular basis. Why doesn't they target that? Why instead does he partner with the international arm of Russian state propaganda, Russia Today and backtracks on releasing disclosures about Russia? Meanwhile he shows no hesitation to aid the cause of Donald Trump, a man who is a threat to Western liberal democracy and the post-World War II security order, by releasing the DNC leaks. As diverse as their political views may be, and as much as you may dislike any of them, it is obvious that neither Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton, John Kasich, Ted Cruz or Gary Johnson is a threat to Western liberal democracy. Frankly, though I digress from the topic, I would vote for either of those candidates before I voted for Donald Trump, and so should any sane person. I guess I am on the same page as Bill Maher on this one, I understand he supported Bernie over Hillary. (For the record I'd vote for Donald Trump before I voted for Adolf Hitler.)

Now what larger picture does that form around Assange? The alleged rape - which would require a certain mixture of testosterone and chemicals in the brain of a man, a brain that is also used to form ones political views - and the seemingly pro-Putin agenda coupled with the fact that he called his party "libertarian" paints the picture that he is probobly of the mindset of the neoreactionary Dark Enlightenment types of people of the alt-right, Donald Trump, UKIP and other right-wing populist and nationalist movements across the Western world. In fact, whenever I hear someone call themselves libertarian nowadays - without being affiliated with a party like the Libertarian Party which has a track record since the 70's of subscribing to the original meaning of libertarianism when it was more or less just a synonym for classical liberalism or being culturally liberal and fiscally conservative - I am suspicious that they are rather something closer to paleolibertarians, which basically combines conservative social philosophy and cultural values with a radical libertarian opposition to government intervention and who also for some reason aligns itself with the Kremlin, like UKIP. That makes me believe that Assange's anit-corruption and transparency exterior is only a means to an end that is at its core anti-democratic and reactionary and as such a danger to my individual liberty and to the entire free world.

Jesus Christ dude, save it for somebody else.

I don't give a fuck about Assange at the end of the day. Hell, he almost fell off of my radar until the whole DNC debacle, which is when "down-the-line" Democrat voters started going ape-shit; hence me assuming that was where a lot of this hostility was originating from in the first place. I'm neither here nor there concerning him.

Seemed well-liked by much on the left until then; though I won't lie, I could've been getting mixed between him and Snowden.

[KrazyK923]

Yeah it certainly looked suspicious that Assange was only using Wikileaks to go after the Democrats. With his ties to Russia, and Trump's ties to Russia, and the release of these emails at the time that they did...it really blew all credibility the organization might have had left.

If you're going to go after a shitty candidate like Clinton, but not an even shittier candidate like Trump, despite multiple glaring unanswered things revolving Trump, like his Tax Returns, then it looks like you're just a political entity going after only one candidate. Which, when watching the interview, seems really obvious at this point.

They claim to be against corruption yet decide not to ever look at Trump? Convenient. Until they actually release Trump's tax information or anything even close to the level of stuff they did for the Democrats, then I'm just dismissing them as another pro-Russia authoritarian hacking group pretending to be for free speech and against corruption.

I do like how he just completely avoids the Snowden question with some bizarre "I helped him out when he was in trouble" comment as if that means Snowden shouldn't have criticized them. I guess he's less anti-corruption and more quid pro quo.

[NoiseTank13]

Don't know what you're talking about dude but this is the only Maher topic I've commented on in recent memory.

Hey, I'm not your dude, dude.

Also my mistake, it seems you are correct.

[Zarc]

Jesus Christ dude, save it for somebody else.

I don't give a fuck about Assange at the end of the day.

You do realize this is a thread on a forum not your email inbox right? Sorry to rub your ego here, but that was not for your benefit alone. I was merely using your post as a runaway for my entry into the discussion, kind of how these things work.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

You do realize this is a thread on a forum not your email inbox right? Sorry to rub your ego here, but that was not for your benefit alone. I was merely using your post as a runaway for my entry into the discussion, kind of how these things work.

That's fine but it seemed like you were aiming all of that at me and if so, it was massive overkill.

I wasn't trying to demean you, just let you know you were putting far too much effort into your post if it was for me. xD

[eschatological]

Bill Maher was actually pretty pro-Bernie throughout the winter and the early Spring, but he was neither surprised nor outraged when Hillary pulled away. Starting around early May, he basically started saying, "Well, Hillary is going to be the nominee, time to start supporting her." He's the sensible Bernie supporter - Bernie would have been nice, but now we've gotta get shit done.

[KrazyK923]

Yeah I'm not sure why people were saying "Maher was a hardcore Clinton activist."

He was routinely endorsing Sanders and his views/platform.

[apples]

maher donates to obama 4 years ago

this translates into donating to a clinton affiliate today

politics

[starlord]

assange has revealed himself to be a russian shill, i will take anything he or his wikileaks says in the future with a giant chunk of salt.

[Rhinopotamus]

But at the same time he shills for Sam Harris with anti muslim rhetoric, shills for atheism, shills for rape culture.

I geuss the Alt Right has no heroes but Trump.

I thought being anti-muslim was anti-rape culture. The only culture I know of that is a "Rape Culture" is Islamic Culture, victims get punished, assailants go free, women can be killed for being "defiled" ect...

- - - Updated - - -

maher donates to obama 4 years ago

this translates into donating to a clinton affiliate today

politics

No, they found a recent donation under the name William Maher... is context that hard for you to read Apples?

[apples]

I thought being anti-muslim was anti-rape culture. The only culture I know of that is a "Rape Culture" is Islamic Culture, victims get punished, assailants go free, women can be killed for being "defiled" ect...

- - - Updated - - -



No, they found a recent donation under the name William Maher... is context that hard for you to read Apples?

thats very clearly not what the op says

[KrazyK923]

It'd be nice to see some proof of this donation, since Assange just throws that out after he's asked why he's only going after Democrats.

[Rhinopotamus]

Bill Maher was actually pretty pro-Bernie throughout the winter and the early Spring, but he was neither surprised nor outraged when Hillary pulled away. Starting around early May, he basically started saying, "Well, Hillary is going to be the nominee, time to start supporting her." He's the sensible Bernie supporter - Bernie would have been nice, but now we've gotta get shit done.

Your idea of sensible is laughable considering Trump and Bernie have more common ground then Hillary and Bernie, but Bernie's entire campaign was a sham. He lied to all you fools saying he was against the establishment... only to endorse the most corrupt member of the establishment... If you all still think he was "fighting for you" you're a fucking moron.

- - - Updated - - -

It'd be nice to see some proof of this donation, since Assange just throws that out after he's asked why he's only going after Democrats.

The stuff they have found on Democrats > The stuff they have found on Republicans...

If you can't accept that your party is a PoS that colluded with the media against Sanders and Trump, practiced media malpractice (and joked getting away with it), and committed voter fraud, and intentionally downplayed the Email Scandal... then yeah you're just a party shill.

[KrazyK923]

The stuff they have found on Democrats > The stuff they have found on Republicans...

Or he's just following a pro-Putin/Trump agenda by releasing Democratic leaks right before the DNC. Notice how he just vaguely says "we will" when asked if he'll ever go after Trump.

I'm pretty sure the DNC prefering Clinton over Sanders (Clinton, who has actually raised a shitload of money for the DNC. Even as a Sanders supporter it wasn't surprising to hear this. Sanders raised very little for the downticket.) isn't as important as Trump having a nefarious relationship with Putin, who is actively attempting to affect our election.

[Rhinopotamus]

What stuff?

Wikileaks outed a number of Republican Politicians for using an escort service a few years ago, I remember MSN trying to jump on it, but it wasn't the great and fell apart pretty quickly.

People mad they ousted the DNC though, and proved just how corrupt the DNC are like, "But, but, but, but the Republicans! Get them! They have Trump and is EEEEVVVVVIIIIILLLLL! He triggers me!"

[Rhamses]

Your idea of sensible is laughable considering Trump and Bernie have more common ground then Hillary and Bernie, but Bernie's entire campaign was a sham. He lied to all you fools saying he was against the establishment... only to endorse the most corrupt member of the establishment... If you all still think he was "fighting for you" you're a fucking moron.

It's kind of hard to determine where Trump has common ground with anyone. He changes positions constantly and doesn't back up anything he says.