“This is how the left stopped the Iraq War.”
Brace yourself for some shocking news. Julian Assange ratfucked the election by leaking information intended to damage Clinton because…his preferred major party candidate was Donald Trump:
In little more than a year, WikiLeaks would be engulfed in a scandal over how it came to publish internal emails that damaged Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, and the extent to which it worked with Russian hackers or Donald Trump’s campaign to do so. But in the fall of 2015, Trump was polling at less than 30 percent among Republican voters, neck-and-neck with neurosurgeon Ben Carson, and Assange spoke freely about why WikiLeaks wanted Clinton and the Democrats to lose the election.
“We believe it would be much better for GOP to win,” he typed into a private Twitter direct message group to an assortment of WikiLeaks’ most loyal supporters on Twitter. “Dems+Media+liberals woudl then form a block to reign in their worst qualities,” he wrote. “With Hillary in charge, GOP will be pushing for her worst qualities., dems+media+neoliberals will be mute.” He paused for two minutes before adding, “She’s a bright, well connected, sadistic sociopath.”
Still, Twitter messages obtained by The Intercept provide an unfiltered window into WikiLeaks’ political goals before it dove into the white-hot center of the presidential election. The messages also reveal a running theme of sexism and misogyny, contain hints of anti-Semitism, and underline Assange’s well-documented obsession with his public image.
Meanwhile, Glenn has immediately lept up to defend Assange’s — and, let us be frank here, Glenn’s — take on the 2016 elections:
Let’s leave aside the fact that the misogyny and anti-Semitism are fairly important points of ideological overlap, and consider how damning what Glenn considers to be a defense is. This isn’t even a heighten-the-contradictions argument. It’s the even stupider variant, the idea that actually Democrats will be worse than Republicans in office because…Republicans are more constrained by left-wing opposition. Evidently, to state this is to refute it. And, in addition, if one was actually on the left it would be pretty obvious that Donald Trump generating some level of ineffectual opposition by signing a massive upper-class tax cut, undermining access to healthcare, deregulating business, putting climate troofers in charge of the EPA, nominating 49-year-old neoconfederates to the Supreme Court, etc. is infinitely worse than…Hillary Clinton just not doing this kind of stuff in the first place. Support for Donald Trump is support for Donald Trump, and doing it because of a transparently stupid pragmatic analysis rather than “ideological agreement” isn’t any more defensible.