Instead, we're getting hints. That's called a "stunt", folks.
But why would WikiLeaks sacrifice their reputation like that?
Fundamentally Assange is a partisan hack at this point who's using what stored credibility he has from his activist days to make a play at influencing a foreign election.
I mean, speaking of reputation damage, hadn't Assange finally managed to bargain an arrangement in which he could face potentially very damaging questioning, but under the auspices of a state actively hostile to the principle of prosecuting him, using their prosecutor, questions prepared in advance and without any prospect of Sweden actually arresting him afterwards? Wasn't that supposed to have been yesterday? Wasn't the announced reason that despite having scheduled the interview exactly the way his legal team and his protectors at the Ecuadorean embassy wanted it, well in advance, his legal team had unfortunately concluded they would be unavailable on that day? Have many people stopped believing that Assange is actually really, really willing to talk to Swedish prosecutors that just keep putting all these unfair obstructions in his way as a result?
Why would a denial or two from Ecuador or even a time-stamped email from Assange at 6pm on Saturday night talking about how much fun he was having on the internet at that moment change anyone's view of Wikileaks?