Assange: ‘Trump will not be allowed to win’

American Thinker ^ | November 4, 2016 | James Longstreet

[detective]

In a most recent and revealing interview, Julian Assange met with his favorite documentarian, John Pilger.  Assange offers several predictions and analyses, most quite revealing. Via RT:

“RT (Russia Today) provides an alternative perspective on major global events, and acquaints international audience with a Russian viewpoint.”

[detective]

“Do not speak your fears as truths.”

I have no idea what that is supposed to mean.

[NicoDon]

This is my exact concern. I think the Brexit vote shocked a lot of the establishment and would probably have been cause for planning for more extreme measures in other areas of the world. I really hope he keeps his head down.

[WildHighlander57]

OK, is it “will not”, (title) “may not” (detective)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3489095/posts?page=1#1

Or “won’t be” (kabar)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3489095/posts?page=55#55

Or “would not” (Florida native)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3489095/posts?page=72#72

Looks like it’s “would not” (detective)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3489095/posts?page=78#78

IN CONTEXT of “ESTABLISHMENT” opposing him (Trump).

So, burkean, your read of it, “would not” is accurate, given the establishment forces in opposition.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3489095/posts?page=73#73

All y’all, thanks for the posts, I am severely hearing impaired, so I appreciate the info.

M.A.G.A. !!

Vote TRUMP!!

[detective]

Assange says “would not”. I say “may not.”

I agree with Assange’s points about the establishment being totally against Trump but I still feel Trump still has a good chance to win.

I was giving my opinion. I was not simply repeating Assange’s opinion.

[kabar]

It amazes me how fixated people are on exactly what Assange said as though he can predict the future. They seem to be hanging on his every word hoping that he has left some wriggle room for us to get the desired outcome.

People need to go out and vote for Trump and get their friends, relatives, etc. to vote as well. Assange is in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and has been there since 2011.

[eastforker]

If God wants Trump to win, Trump will win

So if by chance hillary wins then that is what God wants also?? That is being way to simplistic, maybe you belong in bible class for 1st graders.

[WildHighlander57]

Thank you for the clarification!

When taken in context, it sounds like assange is talking about the “establishment” not wanting Mr Trump to be President.

Context is what gets left out by the media...

[Burkean]

It’s another example of how the press alters reality to suit a selected agenda. Their false version makes it sound like Assange believes Trump will not be elected, whereas his real statement indicates Assange believes Trump would not be elected if the truth was not coming about about Hillary Clinton.

[Albion Wilde]

“Do not speak your fears as truths.”

Directed at Assange, not at you.

[Albion Wilde]

Stop that kind of talk.

[freepertoo]

Yep. It’s no more simplistic than Jesus’ prayer in the garden — not my will, but yours. We can’t always understand God’s ways. I DO believe He has raised Trump up. I DO believe Trump will win.

[GGpaX4DumpedTea]

Does that mean that if Hillary wins...

Not gonna happen!

[NYAmerican]

Play the interview video. At 1 minute, 10 seconds Assange says “Trump will not be permitted to win”. Is that the misquote? Will not be “allowed” vs. “permitted”? Quite a misquote.

[Hostage]

MAY not be allowed vs. WILL not be allowed is what the headline and post #1 bring to conflict. The initiator of this thread is the source of the conflicting words.

The video:

“What is Wikileaks doing? Are they trying to put Trump in the White House?”

“Trump WOULD NOT BE permitted to win. Banks, Intelligence, Arms Companies, Big Foreign Money, etc. all united behind Hillary Clinton. And the Media as well. So, Media Owners, and even journalists themselves ....”

*********************************************

What he’s saying here is that without Wikileaks, the players he cites in his response would not allow Trump to be President.

The inference is that WITH WIKILEAKS, THESE PLAYERS MIGHT NOT SUCCEED IN DENYING TRUMP A WIN. It’s not a certainty they will succeed because Wikileaks has helped to expose them.

He’s answering the question. He’s saying that without Wikileaks, Trump will lose. With Wikileaks Trump has a chance.