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

[Theodarzna]

A fascinating and unprecedented interview took place on HBO's “Real Time” between WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and longtime host Bill Maher.

Why "fascinating" and "unprecedented"?

Because for the first time since I've been covering media, an interviewee called out an interviewer with hacked content about him, presenting it publicly for the first time for more than 1 million viewers to see at home and countless more in viral replays.

To review, Maher was hammering Assange, saying he was "working with a bad actor [Russia] to put [his] thumb on the scale [against Hillary Clinton] and basically f--- with the one person who stands in the way of us being ruled by Donald Trump.”

The accusation comes after WikiLeaks released almost 20,000 emails from the Democratic National Committee illustrating a coordinated effort by the supposedly neutral DNC against Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt) during the Democratic primary season.

The evidence was so embarrassing, so blatant, so clear that Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz had to resign and many top staffers also were forced to step down.

Maher, however, insisted to Assange that "there was no plot" to take down Sanders and kept pressing him to find information damaging to the Republican nominee.

“Why don’t you hack into Donald Trump’s tax returns?” asked Maher.

"Well, we're working on it," replied Assange.

WikiLeaks later walked back the statement via Twitter, saying “WikiLeaks isn’t ‘working on’ hacking Trump’s tax-returns. Claim is a joke from a comedy show. We are ‘working on’ encouraging whistleblowers.”

It was then that Assange, who conducted the interview from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, posed an unexpected question to Maher:

“Just before I came here we thought we’d do a little search in our files, and I do notice that a William Maher gave a Clinton-affiliated entity a million dollars," Assange said. "Now it’s a William Maher in Los Angeles at the time that it came."

"Perhaps you’d like to comment. Is that you?” he asked.

Maher — who clearly heard the question correctly — quickly deflected to a $1 million donation he made four years ago to the Obama reelection campaign.

“I don’t think you have to look in your files to find that, Julian," he condescendingly scolded Assange to applause. "I, I, I gave Obama a million dollars. I made it public."

"The whole point of it was to make it public so people in 2012 would understand that the game had moved to the million-dollar level after our Citizens United ruling," Maher explained. "I wasn't trying to hide it. I was trying to publicize it. I don't know what the point is."

Assange pushed back: "Is there another million dollars going to Hillary or equivalent?"

"F--- no," replied Maher. "I can't give a million dollars anytime someone runs for president."

The two moved on from there.

But does that settle the issue?

Maher can contribute to whichever candidate he likes. It's his money and his right. And just like Rush Limbaugh, Maher is an entertainer and political satirist, not a journalist. If he did donate to Clinton, he's not breaking any rules.

His net worth is estimated to be between $22 million to $30 million. He recently signed a new multimillion-dollar contract through 2018. His viewership has never been higher.

But his dismissal of making this donation to Clinton is a particularly hard sell.

According to the White Pages, there are exactly three people named William Maher currently living in Los Angeles.

So if Maher is to be believed, that he's not the William Maher who made a $1 million donation to Hillary Clinton — which is the same exact amount the HBO star very publicly made to President Obama in 2012 — then one of the other two Los Angeles-based men named William Maher made the gaudy donation.

Given that a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the U.S. population makes donations of that amount to any campaign, the odds that this Bill Maher of Los Angeles — celebrity and activist — didn't write this check are almost impossible-to-one.

[...]

According to the White Pages, there are exactly three people named William Maher currently living in Los Angeles.

So if Maher is to be believed, that he's not the William Maher who made a $1 million donation to Hillary Clinton — which is the same exact amount the HBO star very publicly made to President Obama in 2012 — then one of the other two Los Angeles-based men named William Maher made the gaudy donation.

Given that a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the U.S. population makes donations of that amount to any campaign, the odds that this Bill Maher of Los Angeles — celebrity and activist — didn't write this check are almost impossible-to-one.

(source)

So, if you haven't heard, Bill Maher interviewed the noted King of Wikileaks, Julian Assange and at first seemed ready to attack Assange as being Anti-Clinton and or helping Trump, only to be stunned by Maher stating that a man by his name and in LA gave 1 million dollars to the Clinton's, thus implying that he was not acting in an unbiased fashion.

It is a bit entertaining to Watch Maher be put on the defensive.

[Bollocks]

I know this is not related but assange really is a piece of shit, and it keeps getting more obvious after his blatant attempt of politicising a death, that his family had to ask not to be politicized. For all I care fuck him.

[I Push Buttons]

Has Assange actually put forward his evidence or is his comment to be taken on faith alone?

[Sunseeker]

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.

[Milchshake]

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.

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.

[Celista]

It is interesting that Assange keeps putting forward blatant inferences during television interviews without backing up his inferences with any sort of evidence.

I know this is not related but assange really is a piece of shit, and it keeps getting more obvious after his blatant attempt of politicising a death, that his family had to ask not to be politicized. For all I care fuck him.

Personally I think if the 27-year-old DNC staffer really was the whistleblower then we the public should know that. While it could be a coincidence, his death coinciding with the leak and two weeks prior to the convention seems like a very large coincidence. This is assuming that what Assange said is true.

Of course if he is not the whistleblower and Assange is just bullshitting the public for an additional 10 seconds of fame/pushing an agenda then yes, he is indeed a piece of shit.

- - - Updated - - -

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.

Yeah I agree, I view him as the left's equivalent of Glenn Beck/Rush Limbaugh. Obnoxious and pushy with his agenda, even if I happen to agree with what he's saying most of the time.

[Endus]

He'd have literally no reason whatsoever to lie. He gave a million bucks to Obama's campaign because he thought Citizens United was a stupid ruling, and wanted to both take advantage of it and bring attention to it.

He still thinks it's stupid. There'd be nothing illegal or hypocritical about him repeating a similar donation to Clinton's campaign, though there's no evidence that he actually did so. Just Assange making implications, without any actual evidence, something he's wont to do.

Plus, I fully believe he's enough of a prick that he'd just have said "yeah, so?" if he really had donated the money this year. What makes it a bit galling is that it's a "Clinton-affiliated entity". That could be the Clinton foundation, a highly-respected charity. Which contributes nothing to the Clinton campaign.

This is less than nothing. Because even if it WAS something, it'd be nothing, and it doesn't even appear to be that.

[Wells]

Kind of amazed the two of them could be in the same room without the weight of their egos forming some kind of singularity and consuming the earth.

[Theodarzna]

He'd have literally no reason whatsoever to lie. He gave a million bucks to Obama's campaign because he thought Citizens United was a stupid ruling, and wanted to both take advantage of it and bring attention to it.

He still thinks it's stupid. There'd be nothing illegal or hypocritical about him repeating a similar donation to Clinton's campaign, though there's no evidence that he actually did so. Just Assange making implications, without any actual evidence, something he's wont to do.

Plus, I fully believe he's enough of a prick that he'd just have said "yeah, so?" if he really had donated the money this year. What makes it a bit galling is that it's a "Clinton-affiliated entity". That could be the Clinton foundation, a highly-respected charity. Which contributes nothing to the Clinton campaign.

This is less than nothing. Because even if it WAS something, it'd be nothing, and it doesn't even appear to be that.

According to the White Pages, there are exactly three people named William Maher currently living in Los Angeles.

So if Maher is to be believed, that he's not the William Maher who made a $1 million donation to Hillary Clinton — which is the same exact amount the HBO star very publicly made to President Obama in 2012 — then one of the other two Los Angeles-based men named William Maher made the gaudy donation.

Given that a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of the U.S. population makes donations of that amount to any campaign, the odds that this Bill Maher of Los Angeles — celebrity and activist — didn't write this check are almost impossible-to-one.

Statistically the odds of him NOT being the donor are really low, unless there is another William Maher who also does that, and only three other William Maher's live in LA.

[Felya]

Statistically the odds of him NOT being the donor are really low, unless there is another William Maher who also does that, and only three other William Maher's live in LA.

There are two problems with this.

First, the source does not show his evidence. Thus, if the evidance does not have a year or specify who the receiver is, like DNC instead of Hillary. Then Maher's explanation makes sense. You are missing a lot of other variables, not just how many people are named William Maher in LA.

Two, Maher doesn't claim to be impartial in the Trump v Clinton campaign. He never has... Trump threatened to sue him, for calling him the spawn of an orangutan. What exactly would Maher donating to Hillary prove? That he supports Hillary? Uhm... Duh...

- - - Updated - - -

Bill Marher's previous week's show closure. Where he asks everyone to put all issues aside to vote against Trump. He claims to give up his issue of "legalizing pot" if it means Hillary wins Ohio.

https://youtu.be/HggNLz5fLFA

What exactly would him donating a million to Hillary prove?

- - - Updated - - -

Has Assange actually put forward his evidence or is his comment to be taken on faith alone?

In last week's show, Maher said he would give up any issue to stop Trump. Showing evidance that he supports Hillary wouldn't reveal something new. If you watch his show, even him lying to somehow protect his none existent neutrality or to help Hillary, should result in a bil ol'... Duh...

Now, if he donated to Trump or even both, then he is a huge hypocrite. Because all he has done is call for everyone to stop Trump. That would be shocking...

[I Push Buttons]

In last week's show, Maher said he would give up any issue to stop Trump. Showing evidance that he supports Hillary wouldn't reveal something new. If you watch his show, even him lying to somehow protect his none existent neutrality or to help Hillary, should result in a bil ol'... Duh...

Now, if he donated to Trump or even both, then he is a huge hypocrite. Because all he has done is call for everyone to stop Trump. That would be shocking...

Not claiming he is neutral, but I don't see why he would deny donating if there is actual proof of his doing so... What would that denial accomplish other than hurting him?

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

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

Gotta love dem politics.

[Nihilist74]

I am voting for Hillary Clinton but even if I had 100 million dollars or a billion, I would not donate 1 million dollars to her or anyone.

[Wells]

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

Gotta love dem politics.

Assange has always been a point of contention among Democrats. Wikileaks has gone seriously downhill in its practices for some time and its cost them a lot of support.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

Assange has always been a point of contention among Democrats. Wikileaks has gone seriously downhill in its practices for some time and its cost them a lot of support.

...and I'm sure it's because they tend to get more dirt on the Democrats? That's not a sign of ill practice. The only way they can get information is via people actually leaking it to them. So if there isn't many if any feeding into them from Republican circles then yes, it's going to appear one-sided.

Doesn't mean it's some conspiracy against Democrats.

I'm assuming this is what you mean?

[Wells]

...and I'm sure it's because they tend to get more dirt on the Democrats?

No, actually it started with them basically abandoning Manning, then there was the whole Turkey leak thing, and the Jews in Iraq they doxxed and so on and so on. You hadn't heard about these?

Assange turning Wikileaks into a platform to pursue his personal grudge against Clinton is just the final straw for some.

[Rudol Von Stroheim]

No, actually it started with them basically abandoning Manning, then there was the whole Turkey leak thing, and the Jews in Iraq they doxxed and so on and so on. You hadn't heard about these?

Assange turning Wikileaks into a platform to pursue his personal grudge against Clinton is just the final straw for some.

I would've abandoned that circus show myself.

[Wells]

Basically Wikileaks has little regard for the consequences of their actions for people who have done nothing wrong. To the point of attacking Edward Snowden when he suggest they dial it back a bit.

[Bapestar]

Bill consistently makes really good points, and the opposition hates his guts. Funny how they are trying so hard to discredit him.

[Gocahser]

The viewers are view the post as wonderful