> they exposed corruption in your favorite political party. No, that would have been fine. The problem is that Assange himself is clearly partisan. I doubt the

> they exposed corruption in your favorite political party. No, that would have been fine. The problem is that Assange himself is clearly partisan. I doubt they would have leaked anything damaging to Trump. There are chat logs attesting to the fact that they timed the leaks to influence the election. Murky secretive organizations can't be trusted, period. It doesn't matter what they are or whether they are "alternative" or "mainstream." I don't see why I should trust Wikileaks any more than I trust the CIA or the FSB. There's no transparency. I have no way of knowing if Assange has an agenda or what that agenda might be. We need an entirely algorithmic / protocol driven leaker platform that verifiably removes human beings from the loop or at least chains their hands when it comes to when to leak things and whether to leak them. (For the record I am not a fan of either of the 2016 candidates. They were both awful, but Trump was worse largely because of the ideological fascists that surrounded and backed him. Trump himself is not ideological, just a power hungry narcissist who will ride whatever horse will take him further.)