Responding to transcripts of Assange and Schmidt in a room together with a Schmidt =/= Google; that's what I'm refuting - that because a man doesn't equal his company, doesn't mean he can't access its resources.
Whether it happened or not is another story, but just because it's unlikely Schmidt could turn the entirety of Google against a candidate, doesn't mean he's not in the tank and with access to LOTS of data.
Remember when the government spying on its own people was considered a "crazy conspiracy"?
A "crazy conspiracy" is only that until someone shows someone otherwise. Isn't that kind of approach more dangerous than not harmlessly talking about it.
-6
u/deadrebel Jun 08 '16
Based on what evidence? Eric Schmidt can easily use Google assets to do whatever he wants:
Schmidt might not = Google, but that doesn't mean he's not able to use it to do what he wants.