This article and a vast majority of comments on it;
- Are total bs -

I mean really I could fart and it would be better than some of the clueless opinions here.

This was all a plot to take out Wikileaks.

Only one thing new happened since the original alleged hacking occurred in 2010 to which Eric Holder under Obama decided not to prosecute, and that is - the Russian Collusion investigation.

Why don't you find out about the backstory about whistleblowers and the CIA's program to build a backdoor into the secure dropbox program for anonymous MSM newspaper whistleblowers;
- Remember a big story about whistleblower protections? -
So that they could get have all whistleblower info routed through them first.
And Wikileaks, probably through compromised staff members or agents who infiltrated Wikileaks started using the same secure dropbox.

Then look up the backstory about Manning.
Look at his part, where and who he trained with.
Then ask yourself how an 'analyst' was able to access all that info he did.

Look up the original facts surrounding the hacking.
Manning was trying to trick Assange into helping him break a password and hack into SIPRnet.
All the info he gave out was to earn Assange's trust, and to trick him into helping him hack into SIPRnet, but Assange didn't take the bait.

Otherwise Obama administration would've prosecuted him.

This is about what Assange knows about Russian Collusion and Seth Rich.

And you people are idiots, you can't spot a stich up when its right in front of you.

And what of all the war-crimes Assange exposed?
Not one person prosecuted.

They hijacked the narrative.
Assange isn't the criminal, they are.

I appear to have stuffed this one right up.
Sorry Belly - Wrong thread...

- But since I'm here -

"we too got in front of the voters not behind following them"

The coin finally drops, he finally gets it...
Good work Belly.

I remember a month or so back when you were talking all this stuff about the 'centre';
You were talking about 'bringing the centre to you'.
(And I was thinking 'That's madness')

It doesn't work that way and I'm glad you're finally starting to see it.
No matter where the pace of progress is, you can't force change.
You can't expect the voters to come to you.
You've got to go to them.

You have to produce a message and policies that resonate with them, if you want their votes.

AC mate, knew you got the wrong thread no worries this thread is not mine it is ours
Now you overlook a fact I was in campaign mode and did not then understand, the voters are not
Now Ise Mise, bloke TRUTH in the end the only thing that matters
My seat is the private property of the National party, ex farmers retire here and we have not held the seat for near two decades
Greens run, but do not have enough members to man the booths
A handful of small parties, some independents in it only for the money
So yes Nats last, Labor on top greens? second Nats, ALWAYS going to win on primary votes,
So preference not used, but just in case? never going to be your mob
PS Labor went backwards by about two point five percent here

From Paul Kelly:

"Any prospect the Labor Party will seriously review the source of its election defeat is remote. The reason is simple — there is no will or incentive for a ruthlessly honest review and, given Scott Morrison’s narrow win, Labor assumes, no doubt correctly, it will be competitive at the next election.

Labor is the party with a history of competitive losses. Being competitive is the substitute for winning. Each defeat holds out the enticing hope of victory next time — and the next time and the next time.

It keeps extolling the Whitlam and Hawke legacies in hollow gestures designed to conceal that it is the anti-Hawke party in terms of governance and the anti-Whitlam party in terms of internal reform.

Meanwhile, Labor has lost seven of the last nine federal elections — and of the two it won, one was a doomed minority government. Labor has passed a new threshold — the party is beyond reform. And nobody gets angry. Nobody stands up and says “enough is enough”.

The party is trapped — tied to a rank-and-file hopelessly to the Left of the Australian public, hostage to a trade union movement locked into counter-productive political activism and entangled in a fatal embrace with the Greens, who steal its votes whenever Labor tries to be responsibly centrist.

So the party and its legion of progressive media supporters get ready to champion the next ALP leader and the next ALP era with the same determination to be blind to the arc of history.

Too much is at stake for real change — too many interests, too many ideological faiths, too much risk to Labor’s competitive position in 2022. Labor is suffocated by its constant self-congratulation. Aware it has good prospects of winning next time, Labor will opt for a fresh leader, new cosmetics and dressed-up adjustments at the margins. It is a familiar story."

Shadow Minister can you find someone worth hearing to quote
See SMH Morrison may be a truly great PM, true in fact he will not be easy to remove
Thankfully he has not got it right with climate change, it is his weakness
Right now facebook is full of posts about saving us from Adani, our branches are often left of the party.
Save the hairy bottomed sea gull stuff
ALBO has as his first task to find a way to fix that
Your mob too have such air wasters,sitting watching Sky while suping on Quecumber sangas, calling for beheading of any one left of one nation
Like the effort you put in but two out of ten mate,quoting such is just lazy real people have said things you could use

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-29/anthony-albanese-must-win-labor-base-government-from-coalition/11157474
Well they have the task and problems right at least, think it is worth reading
From inside the tent I definitely think, our problem IS wanting to be nice and cute to what was once our base
A truth
More ex Labor voters than current Liberals, want the boats stopped
Too do not want offshore detainees brought here
Do not believe me? then you are part of the problem not the solution
Many, far too many, want policy that sheds votes, no matter what it brings,