International (Reuters) IMF board approves $4.2 bln financing deal with Ecuador

Everyone has a price...

ZealousMiserableAsianelephant.webp
 
3/8/19: Chelsie Manning arrested for not testifying to a Grand Jury investigating Wikileaks
3/11/19: Equador gets $4.2B financing deal from IMF
4/4/19: Wikileaks announces that Assange will be expelled from the Ecuadorian Embassy for Wikileaks reporting on corruption in Ecuador (Wikileaks did not break this story, simply reported on it) - Ecuador denies this is going to happen.
4/11/19: Assange is expelled from Ecuadorian Embassy.
4/11/19: Assange arrested on extradition warrant by the US for conspiracy to commit computer intrusion.
 
I'm sure it's not a coincidence and I don't a problem. They should have expelled him years ago. At least they got something out of it.
 
Trotsky said:
I bet working on that production crew is a legit blast (as long as you aren't smart enough or don't care enough to know it's snake oil).
Click to expand...
It's likely a blast BECAUSE they know it's all theater. They call over Rogan and Eddie, get baked and start brainstorming a bigger shark to jump.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Why?
Click to expand...
I just generally disagree with him spreading government information without authorization, avoiding sexual assault charges, and hiding in someone's embassy instead of facing trials/consequences for his actions.
 
panamaican said:
I just generally disagree with him spreading government information without authorization,avoiding sexual assault charges, and hiding in someone's embassy instead of facing trials/consequences for his actions.
Click to expand...
Do you think Daniel Ellsberg, or the WP, should have asked for permission before publishing the Pentagon Papers?
Do you really think Assange was seeking asylum from sexual assault charges, or from being extradited to the US?
Do foreign embassies normally give asylum to people just because they don't want to go to jail for sexual assault?
 
Anung Un Rama said:
Do you think Daniel Ellsberg, or the WP, should have asked for permission before publishing the Pentagon Papers?
Do you really think Assange was seeking asylum from sexual assault charges, or from being extradited to the US?
Do foreign embassies normally give asylum to people just because they don't want to go to jail for sexual assault?
Click to expand...
1) No.
2) The 2nd one. But the 1st one was still out there.
3) No.

None of which changes my opinion on Assange. Daniel Ellsberg wasn't hiding out in some embassy. He turned himself in, went to trial and beat it. And while Assange might have been trying to avoid extradition for breaking our laws, he was simultaneously avoiding trial for the sexual assault charges and denying that alleged victim a chance at having her attacker punished (assuming she could win).

As for foreign embassies it shouldn't be a big deal when they stop giving asylum to someone who is basically just using them to avoid facing charges from that country's most powerful continental neighbor.
 
panamaican said:
1) No.
2) The 2nd one. But the 1st one was still out there.
3) No.

None of which changes my opinion on Assange. Daniel Ellsberg wasn't hiding out in some embassy. He turned himself in, went to trial and beat it. And while Assange might have been trying to avoid extradition for breaking our laws, he was simultaneously avoiding trial for the sexual assault charges and denying that alleged victim a chance at having her attacker punished (assuming she could win).

As for foreign embassies it shouldn't be a big deal when they stop giving asylum to someone who is basically just using them to avoid facing charges from that country's most powerful continental neighbor.
Click to expand...

It seems pretty clear that Assange was not running form the sexual assault charges.
And Assange was not an American citizen, why would he give himself up to us? Why would he give himself up to anybody? Did the WP give themselves up? And seeing how Chelsea Manning, who better fits the Ellsberg analogy tbf, was tortured for her "crime", its understandable that a foreign embassy might give asylum to somebody who may suffer the same unjust fate.

I get that you don't like Assange, but that shouldn't be a reason to accept his arrest, potential torture, and subsequent rigged trial that will inevitably set negative a presidence against the standards of a free press.
 


^^^^^^^^^^Flip-flopping, lying motherfucker!
 
Trotsky said:
That's dated one month ago

​
With that said, this is a conspiracy I can sink my teeth into given Moreno's neoliberal tendencies and friendliness toward foreign capital.
Click to expand...

Moreno is from the same party as Correa.

The difference is that he has to deal with the massive debt burden Correa left him.

https://www.ceicdata.com/en/indicator/ecuador/external-debt

I2nslN.jpg


Funny how it works for you socialists.

Apparently market friendly reforms aimed at establishing a sustainable revenue base in order to fund social welfare is "neoliberalism" "submitting to foreign interests". Yet accruing a massive debt burden isnt.

Even since the XIX debt has been the main excuse foreign powers use to intervene in Latin America.

Without economic freedom there is no freedom, that applies both at the individual level and the nation level. The fact is that Moreno is dealing with Correa's mess.
 
RE: 4.2 billion... why so much?

Great link from 2016:
The Top 100 Most Damaging WikiLeaks


“The further a society drifts from truth,
the more it will hate those who speak it.”
— George Orwell

1. Obama lied: he knew about Hillary’s secret server and wrote to her using a pseudonym, cover-up happened (intent to destroy evidence)



  • I can’t state how huge this is, it’s a cover up involving the President of the United States. There are a lot of emails implying this, but this email states it very clearly so anyone can understand. The email proves obstruction of justice and shows how they lied to the FBI, and likely perjury of Congress. This at the very least proves intent by her Chief of Staff.
  • Obama used executive privilege on their correspondence. Cheryl Mills (who was given immunity) states they need to “clean up” the Clinton/Obama e-mails because they lacked state.gov.
  • Additionally, Obama on video publicly denied knowing about the server. He also claimed on video that he learned about the secret server through the news like everyone else. The corruption goes all the way to the top! Obama is lying to the American public.
  • Hillary Clinton set up her private server to hide her pay to play deals discovered throughout these leaks, and to prevent FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) requests.
  • Paul Combetta was hired to modify the email headers that referred to a VERY VERY VIP individual, i.e; change the name of who it was from. If you read Stonetear/Combetta story, it’s easy to see this is exactly what he was attempting. He wanted to change header information on already sent mail to show “state.gov” instead of Hillary’s private email address. Multiple people informed him of the infeasibility (and illegality) of it, so somewhere in the next 6 days it was decided that simply eradicating them was the only option left.
  • The FBI said they could not find intent of trying to break the law, therefore no recommendation of prosecution. This email proves, in plain language, that there was intention, and knowingly broke the law.
  • Ask yourselves: why would they both be communicating on a secret server to each other? Why not through normal proper channels? What were they hiding? We may soon find out…

2. Hillary Clinton dreams of completely “open trade and open borders”


  • This was stated at one of her $225,000 paid secret speeches to Wall Street that she has tried desperately to hide… This email contains those speeches in those attachments.
  • Border protection is important. Borders add safety and sovereignty to a country. Borders helps prevent illegal immigration, which limits crime, drugs, human/sex trafficking across the border and allows more Americans (including African Americans and Latinos) to get jobs. It also costs the working class an exorbitant amount of money in higher taxes and leads to higher national debt. Mexico protects their southern border (with the help of $75 million from Obama).
  • During the 3rd debate, Hillary tried to pivot away from this damning topic by stating she only meant energy. Read the quote for yourself, energy is just one aspect of her open borders policy.

3. Hillary Clinton took money from and supported nations that she KNEW funded ISIS and terrorists

  • http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3774
  • http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/5469
  • http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/1828
  • “…the governments of Qatar and Saudi Arabia, which are providing clandestine financial and logistic support to ISIL and other radical Sunni groups in the region.”
  • “Clintons should know better than to raise money from folks whose primary concern has been supporting the NIAC, a notorious supporter of the Radical Islamic Mullahs. “The Clinton’s have thrown principle out the window in exchange for cold hard cash…putting money ahead of principle.”
  • Hillary’s Chief of Staff admits in the 2nd link that foreign interests sway Hillary to do what they want her to do (money for mandatory appearances). She also admits that the “Friend of Hillary” list is available and rentable to people who want to influence, but that it’s too sensitive to talk in email.
  • This leak shows Hillary knows Saudis and Qatar are funding ISIS, which is an enemy of the state. After knowing this, Hillary accepted tens of millions in donations from these terrorist-funding governments (of course they are getting something back in return). She also supported arms deals to them.
  • Saudi Arabia and Qatar commit horrible acts under Sharia law, including throwing gay people off of buildings, persecuting Christians, Jews, and atheists, and making it legal to rape and beat women. They are the leading funders of Hillary and her campaign through the Clinton Foundation.

4. Hillary has public positions on policy and her private ones

  • http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/927
  • “But If Everybody’s Watching, You Know, All Of The Back Room Discussions And The Deals, You Know, Then People Get A Little Nervous, To Say The Least. So, You Need Both A Public And A Private Position.”

  • This leak is a big one because anything she tells us that she will do can and should be considered questionable. Whenever Hillary tells the public a position, a goal, or what she will do for America, there is no way we can be sure if she has an opposite, private position.
  • This was one of her private paid $225,000 speeches to Wall Street. Behind closed doors she is telling her Wall Street donors one thing, and the American people another thing. Think about that for a moment…

5. Paying people to incite violence and unrest at Trump rallies

  • http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/3833
  • http://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/31335
  • “Engage immigrant rights organizations. DREAMers have been bird dogging Republican presidential candidates on DACA/DAPA, but they’ve learned to respond. There’s an opportunity to bird dog and record questions about Trump’s comments and connect it to the policy.”
  • “It doesn’t matter what the friggin’ legal and ethics people say, we need to win this motherfucker” (from video below)
  • “I mean honestly, it is not hard to get some of these ass holes to pop off, it’s a matter of showing up, to want to get into the rally, in a Planned Parenthood t-shirt. Or, Trump is a Nazi, you know? You can message to draw them out, and draw them to punch you.”

  • This video is the proof, please watch it!
  • “Bird-dogging” is a term coined by high level Clinton staffers who openly talk about it in the video. They boast about inciting violence at Trump rallies, paying for every “protest”, manipulating Americans through the media to think that Trump is dangerous, and tricking people into thinking Trump supporters are violent and bad.
  • They laugh about paying off mentally ill and homeless people for years to incite violence against conservatives. Truly despicable. And they pretended to be Bernie supporters while they were “protesting”.
  • They admit to starting the Chicago riot where police were seriously hurt, and admit to shutting down the freeway in Arizona, partnering with Black Lives Matter. We even have proof that Hillary paid people to shut down the Chicago rally.
  • Inciting a riot is illegal under 18 US Code § 2102.
  • They also think 50% of people in Iowa and Wisconsin are racists, as they state in the video.
  • Robby Mook, Clinton Campaign Manager, mentions the Priorities SuperPAC in a leak, which is implicated in the video.
  • Bob Creamer (who was fired) claims in the video that the campaign knew about everything. Bob Creamer visited the White House 340 times and personally met with Obama 45 times.

6. Hillary’s campaign wants “unaware” and “compliant” citizens...
Much more here:
http://themillenniumreport.com/2016/10/the-top-100-most-damaging-wikileaks/
 
I thought Ecuador was doing awesome. All they need is the warm glow of socialism.
 
Anung Un Rama said:
It seems pretty clear that Assange was not running form the sexual assault charges.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter. He was still not facing them.

Anung Un Rama said:
And Assange was not an American citizen, why would he give himself up to us? Why would he give himself up to anybody? Did the WP give themselves up? And seeing how Chelsea Manning, who better fits the Ellsberg analogy tbf, was tortured for her "crime", its understandable that a foreign embassy might give asylum to somebody who may suffer the same unjust fate.

I get that you don't like Assange, but that shouldn't be a reason to accept his arrest, potential torture, and subsequent rigged trial that will inevitably set negative a presidence against the standards of a free press.
Click to expand...

He was not an Ecuadorian citizen either.

I don't really have an opinion on Assange. I neither like nor dislike him.

However, I don't see any problems with his arrest and subsequent trial. He turned himself in to Britain in 2010 and he only ran to Ecuador when he lost his extradition hearing. It's no different than any common criminal jumping bail. That's why we take their passports. He was perfectly fine turning himself in and facing his charges and as soon as he lost, suddenly, he's an Ecuadorian.

I don't support that type of thing, jumping bail. If he didn't want to face the heat, he never should have turned himself in the first time.
 
panamaican said:
He was not an Ecuadorian citizen either.

I don't really have an opinion on Assange. I neither like nor dislike him.

However, I don't see any problems with his arrest and subsequent trial. He turned himself in to Britain in 2010 and he only ran to Ecuador when he lost his extradition hearing. It's no different than any common criminal jumping bail. That's why we take their passports. He was perfectly fine turning himself in and facing his charges and as soon as he lost, suddenly, he's an Ecuadorian.

I don't support that type of thing, jumping bail. If he didn't want to face the heat, he never should have turned himself in the first time.
Click to expand...
If you understood this issue you would know what this means for journalists moving forward.

It seems that to be a mod, you must have some bias against free political speech by nature.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,236,980
Messages
55,458,964
Members
174,787
Latest member
Freddie556

Share this page

Back
Top