Michael Moore launches site for Trump whistleblowers

[KingOrfeo]

Moore:

Today, I’m launching TrumpiLeaks, a site that will enable courageous whistleblowers to privately communicate with me and my team. We need patriotic Americans in government, law enforcement or the private sector, who have knowledge of crimes, breaches of public trust or misconduct committed by Donald J. Trump and his associates, to blow the whistle in the name of protecting the United States of America from tyranny.

We’ve put together several tools you can use to securely send information and documents as well as photographs, video and/or audio recordings. While no form of digital communication is 100% secure, the tools we’re using at TrumpiLeaks provide the most secure technology possible to protect your anonymity (and if you don’t require anonymity, you can just email me).

Trumpileaks site.

I doubt many Litsters are insiders who have any useful dirt on Trump, but if you are and have, send it to Trumpileaks!

 

[Hashtag47]

I'm sure there is a 4chan raid being planned right now.

 

[KingOrfeo]

I'm sure there is a 4chan raid being planned right now.

[shrug] That won't do any damage.

 

[HisArpy]

[shrug] That won't do any damage.

Maybe, maybe not.

It'll be interesting to see if Moore winds up an indicted co-conspirator at some point.

 

[Hashtag47]

[shrug] That won't do any damage.

They're rarely meant to do damage, just to make a mockery of stupid shit.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Maybe, maybe not.

It'll be interesting to see if Moore winds up an indicted co-conspirator at some point.

Of what crime? There are laws protecting whistleblowers, and have been since before real Independence. Moore comments on them at length:

In this video, a former congressman is passionately testifying about the importance of whistleblowers and the need to protect the First Amendment. He states:

Enshrined in the First Amendment of the Constitution, we all know, are these words: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. The freedom of speech and the press form the bedrock of our democracy by ensuring the free flow of information to the public. Although Thomas Jefferson warned that, “Our liberty cannot be guarded but by the freedom of the press, nor that limited without danger of losing it,” today this freedom is under attack.

The young congressman goes on to decry the harassment, legal threats and even jailing of American journalists. He continues:

Compelling reporters to testify, and in particular, compelling reporters to reveal the identity of confidential sources, intrudes on the newsgathering process and hurts the public. Without the assurance of confidentiality, many whistleblowers will simply refuse to come forward, and reporters will be unable to provide the American public with the information they need to make decisions as an informed electorate. But with all this focus on newsgathering, it is important that we state clearly: Protecting a journalist's right to keep a news source confidential is not about protecting reporters; it is about protecting the public's right to know.

Indeed, the power and the importance of whistleblowing is part of the American tradition and as old as the republic itself. On July 30, 1778, the Continental Congress voted unanimously for the first whistleblower legislation in the U.S: “Resolved, That it is the duty of all persons in the service of the United States, as well as all other the inhabitants thereof, to give the earliest information to Congress or other proper authority of any misconduct, frauds or misdemeanors committed by any officers or persons in the service of these states, which may come to their knowledge.” This legislation came in response to the first known act of whistleblowing in our country’s history, when in 1777, 10 revolutionary sailors decided to blow the whistle on a powerful naval officer who participated in the torture of captured British soldiers. The sailors paid a price. They were sued and jailed for their courageous actions. But in the end, our Founding Fathers agreed that the sailors were doing their patriotic duty by reporting this crime. They made sure their legal fees were covered, protected them from retaliation and unanimously passed the 1778 whistleblower protection law.

<snip>

As for the former congressman quoted above, he’s moved on to bigger and better things. His name is Michael Richard Pence, the Vice President of the United States. Who knows, he might even back you up on this.

 

[KingOrfeo]

They're rarely meant to do damage, just to make a mockery of stupid shit.

That might have some effect, more's the pity, on the general tone of discussion on a messageboard, but on Trumpileaks, which is not a messageboard, such stupid and pointlesss and dishonest efforts will simply be disregarded as they should be. Only submissions that might be legally or impeachably relevant willl get any attention, and such are beyond the knowledge, capacity and comprehension of the worthless subhuman kind of 4chaners you seem to be talking about.

 

[Boxlicker101]

I hope he does get responses, but not just on Trump supporters. Others are just as crooked.

 

[HisArpy]

Of what crime? There are laws protecting whistleblowers, and have been since before real Independence. Moore comments on them at length:

Reality whatshername is gonna find out REAL QUICK how well the 1st amendment protects people who leak classified information. Moore just may be in on that too if anyone leaks intel to him at his request.

Also, you seem to not know what a "whistleblower" really is. A "whistleblower" isn't someone who reveals information to the general public. A "whistleblower" is someone who reveals information to the person responsible for following up on that information. ie; the cops or government agency. Not the press or some cosmic jackass who sets up an internet site.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Reality whatshername is gonna find out REAL QUICK how well the 1st amendment protects people who leak classified information. Moore just may be in on that too if anyone leaks intel to him at his request.

If a whistleblower leaks classified info to the media, the media has a right to publish it without prior restraint. That was settled in the Pentagon Papers case, and nobody in any media outlet was convicted in connection with it, nor should they have been. The public's right to know trumps all else.

Also, you seem to not know what a "whistleblower" really is. A "whistleblower" isn't someone who reveals information to the general public. A "whistleblower" is someone who reveals information to the person responsible for following up on that information. ie; the cops or government agency. Not the press or some cosmic jackass who sets up an internet site.

Lie.

 

[Conager]

That might have some effect, more's the pity, on the general tone of discussion on a messageboard, but on Trumpileaks, which is not a messageboard, such stupid and pointlesss and dishonest efforts will simply be disregarded as they should be. Only submissions that might be legally or impeachably relevant willl get any attention, and such are beyond the knowledge, capacity and comprehension of the worthless subhuman kind of 4chaners you seem to be talking about.

So Michael Moore is going to be able to know what information is real and what information is made up, how?

we have major news organizations running actual stories where they were read memos over the phone. They weren't even allowed to look over someone's shoulder at whether or not the someone even bothered to take the time to type it up and put it on a piece of paper.

The ability to instantly create any kind of document you want now is so much more advanced than the crap that fooled Dan Rather. That was transparently obvious to anyone who didn't take a look at it with the idea of believing it was true.

There's absolutely no way to tell what so ever if a printed out copy of an email is actually legitimate or not; anyone could type anything into any of the fields.

 

[KingOrfeo]

So Michael Moore is going to be able to know what information is real and what information is made up, how?

Doesn't matter. Trumpileaks will pass it all along to public authorities who have ways of finding out whether it is made up or not -- but not, hopefully, ways of finding out who submitted it, that is the whole point of a secured website for the purpose of anonymous whistleblowing. But if anonymity doesn't matter, then, as Moore says, just email him the information.

 

[Conager]

If a whistleblower leaks classified info to the media, the media has a right to publish it without prior restraint. That was settled in the Pentagon Papers case, and nobody in any media outlet was convicted in connection with it, nor should they have been. The public's right to know trumps all else.



Lie.

You are a horrible lawyer.

The NYT did not actively solicit classified material. Once in their possession through no action of their own their knowledge of what was in that was newsworthy.

According to your theory anyone could solicit any classified document receive said classified document published classified document receive money for doing so and suffer no consequence.

 

[Ms_Ann]

He couldn't make any money off Obama. 10 BigMacs a day start to add up.

 

[Conager]

Doesn't matter. Trumpileaks will pass it all along to public authorities who have ways of finding out whether it is made up or not

That is not his stated opersting model. What sense would that make? They get a document from XYZ agency, they take it over there and ask, "hey is this legit?" The agency says, " No, no give that to us...it's not legit...don't publish!"

You have a very weird idea about the competency of "The Authorities!" Where would you even begin to look for the authorities on any particular issue?

How would you are most whistleblowers have any idea whether what it is they're handing over is or isn't traceable back to them?

Do you have any idea about the concept of need to know? If a particular document is not in your area of need to know not only can you not verify whether it is or isn't valid you're not going to see it. And if you do take it to where these so-called whistleblower got it from if that particular agency is supporting Trump why are they going to back up The Whistleblower?

...and then the whole concept some anti Trump whistleblower sitting on a document right now when every major paper is publishing leaks like crazy is just silly. What secret piece of information are they just waiting to give to Michael Moore and Michael Moore alone? The whole idea is retarded.

 

[KingOrfeo]

According to your theory anyone could solicit any classified document receive said classified document published classified document receive money for doing so and suffer no consequence.

Of course anyone may legally solicit any classified document, there is no law against that, and anyone may publish any document so received without prior restraint, that is constitutionally protected, but also without immunity from legal consequences, which are not so protected --and to which such matters rarely apply, and that is how it should be, and receipt of money is here legally completely irrelevant.

 

[Conager]

Of course anyone may legally solicit any classified document, there is no law against that, and anyone may publish any document so received without prior restraint, but also without immunity from legal consequences -- which rarely apply, and that is how it should be, and receipt of money is here legally completely irrelevant.

...so... if I get caught with a trove of documents that I'm thinking of turning over the Russians for some big cash as long as I say I was planning on publishing them everything's cool?

 

[KingOrfeo]

...so... if I get caught with a trove of documents that I'm thinking of turning over the Russians for some big cash as long as I say I was planning on publishing them everything's cool?

Then you might be be prosecuted for treason for publishing them, but the law would have no power to stop the publication.

 

[Conager]

Then you might be be prosecuted for treason for publishing them, but the law would have no power to stop the publication.

...yet you insist Moore is in no legal peril.

...and treason would not be the charge. We are not even in a cold war with Russia, much less a declared one.

... and since I wouldn't obviously tell them that I had got them with the idea that I would be able to sell them to the Russians they obviously wouldn't be able to use that as my motive.

You are saying that any spy can have a ready-to-wear cover- I only got it because I was thinking about publishing.

I'm looking forward to the colonel deconstructing you because I am 100% certain that he's read every word of the Pentagon papers Supreme Court case.

...at least that's tge backstory I gave my Hogan alt.

 

[Libsam]

Wait, Michael Moore doesn't like Trump?

His Trump campaign ad was the most moving and beautiful campaign ad I've ever seen in my entire life.

 

[Libsam]

Found it!

TRUMP’S ELECTION WILL BE THE BIGGEST “FUCK YOU” IN HISTORY - Michael Moore

It's like Lauren Hill singing:
"I felt he found my letters and read each one out loud"

 

[lilmissfilthy]

Desperate plea for attention. It'll flop like everything else Moore has done over the past decade.

 

[Comshaw]

He couldn't make any money off Obama. 10 BigMacs a day start to add up.

Ad hominem – attacking the arguer instead of the argument.

Abusive fallacy – a subtype of ad hominem that verbally abuses the opponent rather than arguing about the originally proposed argument.




Comshaw

 

[KingOrfeo]

I hope he does get responses, but not just on Trump supporters. Others are just as crooked.

He's not seeking dirt on Trump supporters, but on his team.

 

[KingOrfeo]

...yet you insist Moore is in no legal peril.

He has lawyers to advise him. I expect anything sent to Trumpileaks will not be published, but turned over to LEOs -- and then, perhaps published if they take no action, but not if publishing is in any way indictable, as with classified info. Most relevant stuff would not be classified info -- certainly nothing predating Trump's inauguration would be.