A lot of people who work for WikiLeaks have the same instinct as me: If you are pushed you push back.
We've got the latest dump by WikiLeaks talking about what this really means in terms of Donald Trump's narrative of pay-for-play, so we've got the State Dept. and the FBI on defense saying this is not really an illumination of anything, how can Hillary Clinton and her team get in front of this?
When you look at the New York Times and you pick it up in the morning, at the top of the paper there's three stories that are anti-Trump. Some of them baseless, some of them silly. And at the bottom you get something about WikiLeaks. Same thing with The Washington Post. Way out of control.
If a source gives us material that is of political, diplomatic, ethical or historical significance that has not been published before and is comprised of official documents or recordings, then we will publish it.
Most of what is done I think is to kept secret so the public won't know. The same is true of what Wikileaks exposed.
But on the contrary Wikileaks is under heavy attack by the government and corporations are participating in that by closing down their websites.
I wasn't terribly familiar. I had read some of the headlines but didn't quite understand difference between WikiLeaks...[Edward] Snowden. And then watching the documentary, working on the film, you got to see his personal journey through this and sort of understand more about what he went through.
Wikileaks has - we specialize in bringing the First Amendment to the world, and we were always very surprised one of our biggest battles would be trying to bring it to the United States under an Obama administration.
The difficulty that WikiLeaks has, of course, is that we can't go around speculating on who our sources are. That would be irresponsible.
WikiLeaks combines several of my prior interests in technology, policy questions, and journalism.
Wikileaks is a democratizing force. Its giving individuals access to decisions and thinking by their representatives and in a democracy that ought to be reflexive.
WikiLeaks does not publish from the jurisdiction of Ecuador, from this embassy or in the territory of Ecuador; we publish from France, we publish from, from Germany, we publish from The Netherlands and from a number of other countries, so that the attempted squeeze on WikiLeaks is through my refugee status; and this is, this is really intolerable. [It means] that [they] are trying to get at a publishing organisation; [they] try and prevent it from publishing true information that is of intense interest to the American people and others about an election.
While many of the established media make losses or go bankrupt, WikiLeaks has survived a major conflict with a superpower, including an unlawful economic blockade by its banks and credit card companies and the detention of its editor. We have no debts. We have not had to fire staff. We have never lost a court case related to our publishing. We have never been forced to censor. Adversity has hardened us.
I don't think we can dignify documents dumped by Wikileaks and just assume that they're all accurate and true.
When Wikileaks comes out, which I have nothing to do with, they're giving classified information. They're giving information about Hillary [Clinton] cheating on the debates. No one mentions that Hillary received the questions to the debates. Seriously, can you imagine if I received the questions? It would be the electric chair, ok?
If your purpose is to understand the clique of people who dominate Washington today, the emails that really matter are the ones being slowly released by WikiLeaks from the hacked account of Hillary Clinton's campaign chair John Podesta.
Was that Donna Brazile, a CNN analyst, or a [Hillary] Clinton partisan? Two batches of emails posted by WikiLeaks show Brazile gave Clinton advisers a heads up about questions the candidate might receive at CNN events during the primaries.
CNN says Donna Brazile, the chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, will no longer be a political commentator for the network. This comes after WikiLeaks posted more emails hacked from a top Hillary Clinton aide.
I can find them strategizing about any number of things in these WikiLeaks email dumps, but there's not a thread on climate change whatsoever. Why is that? If climate change were that big a deal to these people, don't you think they would be talking about it internally?
Millennials really don't turn out in numbers that people expect and hope for. Speaking of global warming and climate change, you know all these emails that WikiLeaks is dumping? I haven't found any on climate change. We got emails from Hillary to her campaign staff and her campaign staff to Hillary.
I do think - you look at actually what WikiLeaks came out with, most of it was just gossipy interest, except for like this Doug Band memo from a Clinton crony in black and white who explained the Clinton Foundation was a profit center for Bill Clinton and people around him.The Russians didn't make that up, that was all Hillary's [Clinton] vulnerability her own.
There have been so many individuals who have really put a lot on the line. That they've sacrificed so much to try to protect the principle of source protection in the journalism world. And I think Julian Assange, and WikiLeaks, and Sarah Harrison have really been extraordinary in standing up for that.
Follow AzQuotes on Facebook, Twitter and Google+. Every day we present the best quotes! Improve yourself, find your inspiration, share with friends
or simply: