Home | About | Donate

Julian Assange is A Political Prisoner Who Has Exposed Government Crimes and Atrocities


#21

I apologize for bringing the Hayduke name into the mix. From where I stand, you are caught up in the trivialities of US party politics and have been convinced that because WL published true but negative info on HRC they have an obligation to be "even handed" and do the same to the RNC. But that is not how journalism works. If somehow WL got a hold of the DNC info but by circumstance does not have any dirt on the RNC, should they then have sat of the DNC info without publishing it? That is what you imply.
The bigger pic is that there's only one party in the current US: The Corporate Party, which has two wings, Dem and Rep. There's really no distinction except for fringe social, environmental and regulatory shadings. I encourage you to watch the detailed Democracy Now interview with Assange linked in the top of this comment section. Assange is not the most engaging speaker (he holds a PhD in Physics) but what he says makes sense. Look what the man has been thru ostensibly for not using a condom during consensual intercourse. Hayduke would surely smell that something is terribly wrong here.


#22

Please don't assume things about me, I don't belong to either "party" anymore. I did not vote for either candidates in the election, I did vote. My state has voted red for decades and had already committed us to Trump in the electoral college. I didn't have a problem with them publishing the DNC emails, I don't think there were any huge smoking guns in it anyway, other than totally ignoring Sanders and trying to discredit him but I had come to that conclusion without the DNC email, the writing was on the wall. Maybe Assange didn't have RNC emails, but someone did, and if it was the same entity that gave Assange the DNC emails then there is where my suspicion lies. I would like to say my thoughts over this whole debacle are country over party. But I also think there are 2 countries, or maybe 2 layers to the country and the little guy doesn't stand much of a chance punching through to the upper layer populated by money, influence, and politics.


#23

"That's a bombshell because evidence that Trump advisers were involved in any way with the release of hacked Hillary Clinton-related emails would be an impeachment-level smoking gun in a scandal that currently involves a lot of reports about sketchy relationships but no proof of clearly illegal conduct. It's only sort of a bombshell because, well, who is this one random source and why does he/she seem to be the only person anywhere who knows this potentially world-shaking information?"


#24

Don't go down the "Russia did it!" road. The 1950 are in the past, Russia is not Communist anymore and thus can not be used to scare people (I hope). Prediction: "Guardian Report" full of shit. Nothing will come of it.


#25

Fuck it I'm out. You're a bot.


#26

Back to our original topic...


#27

Many things are possible, but he is not a rapist. If you knew any of the long ago published details of the case against him, which you obviously do not, you would understand that the first Swedish prosecutor involved 4 years ago dismissed the case for lack of evidence.

It is a purely political case, kept alive by US pressure.


#28

Wow, too cowardly to even give me a heads up I'm being talked about, huh?

First things first, I'm not a Democrat, so you can drop that idiocy right now. But that's just one of the things you're wrong about.

Did Assange try to sway the US election? Absolutely, and he was clear about that, teasing greater and greater revelations (that never came, btw, cuz your boy's a liar) and dribbling out info to keep the story fresh (and hismelf being talked about, cuz your boy's got an ego bigger than Trump's).

So you're okay with it? All right.

Assange also stepped up to defend Trump in regard to his ties to Russia:

But then, Assange has always seemed to have a soft spot for Putin. He defended Russia after the Panama Papers came out and has never published one thing critical of Russia or Putin. Why is that, do you think? Do you and Assange believe Putin to be a gift to advocates of gov't transparency everywhere?

So, you're in league with a Trump supporting, Putin supporting man who is hiding from authorities over questions of sexual impropriety. He's the hero here, according to you.

People really, REALLY need to read about what happened to Wikileaks in the many years since the Manning docs were released. It's not at all the same organization, with many good people, who are actually truly committed to transparency, leaving because of Assange and his authoritarian nature, but then, that should be obvious by the people he chooses to assist.


#29

I certainly hope you ask for all this proof from everyone.

Assange took documents hacked by the Russians and published them in order to get Russia's preferred candidate elected. Assange defends Russia and Putin, and has never published one negative thing about them.

Oh, and Wikileaks' new serveres? They're located in Moscow. How'd that happen?


#30

Utter nonsense, unworthy of comment.


#31

File under Russian Asset...


#32

I write the truth, Clovis, or do you have quotes from Assange condemning Putin?

Are you claiming that Assange didn't defend Putin after the Panama Papers came out? Or is that not worth responding to, either?

Or are you just a bot? Because you're sounding like a bot now.


#33

That's not true and I have read about the case. I know Assange's attorney says that. I know some on the progressive "Left" say that--but they're the ones who told me Trump just wanted peace too. In reality, Sweden wants him extradited to face charges in Swedish court. If he goes to jail, it'll be in Sweden.

Swedish extradition law exempts "political offense" as does their US agreement. The Swedish Supreme Court has already ruled espionage to fit that billing and any new to test of the meaning of that phrase would be a long term thing. From my understanding, he'd be either cleared or in jail there by that time. The US would have to request it, the government would have to grant it, then of course Assange would disagree and challenge. It'd have to work its way up the legal ladder. Moreover, Swedish law prevents third-party extraditions and requires extradition for "like" crimes under the law, meaning what was done has to be a crime in both countries. They'd also have to get the UK's permission to extradite.

I'm not a international law attorney, but from what I've read, extraditing Assange isn't an easy step process at all. Sweden has its own reasons for wanting him apart from the US. Whether or not you agree he raped somebody, they want him to face charges for it there.


#34

Since we're talking about Russian propaganda here (hard not to when Assange is the subject), I thought some might be interested in this:

The Russian's are good at this, maybe better than the US is.


#35

Complete and utter bull. NYT, good source there. So dependable. WMD and all that. But go ahead and keep pushing for World War III. Trump may even eventually listen to you.


#36

Hey there, trollbot. Am I pushing for WWIII? I'd call that a radical interpretation of the text.

I know some of you right-wingers and pretend lefties like to believe that the USA is the only bad actor in the world, but she really isn't. Russia is a bad actor, too. I'm talking Pauly Shore bad. No, even worse, Rob Schneider bad (those are references to American movie actors, so you might not be familiar with them).

Hey, Clovis, tell me how great the new law in Russia about beating women is.

And tell me how great it is to persecute homosexuals, too.


#37

you arrive at conclusion based on an absence of evidence. Your capacity for thought is zero.


#38

Yes, yes, I'm amazingly stupid. Now then, what, exactly are you talking about? You're getting downright cryptic here, or perhaps you're just so advanced I can't keep up. Either way, explain yourself.

And you dropped an article. Is that just an accident or a symptom of English not being your mother tongue?


#39

Wikileaks had not merely bought or acquired Russian servers, they had given Chayanov and Hostkey their SSL keys. That in turn meant that Vladimir Putin, Chayanov’s boss, can see the IP of everybody reading anything on Wikileaks


#40

At least we agree on something.

No media source has ever disavowed anything Wikileaks has reported because it report facts. Notably you don't argue the veracity of it's releases. Is it so terrible that the public knows the DNC cheated the democratic process? An informed public is a bad thing - more than a little irony to point a finger at Russia.

Evidently you prefer to rely upon media that gets it wrong on purpose?

You derive evidence from what you say Wikileaks has not reported. Rumsfeld would be proud.

Wikileaks have no Russians on staff. Russian government documents are in Russian and there are several "Russian" whistle blowers and they leak materials to Russian publishers primarily for Russians to read. Imagine that. Russian documents discovered by Russian speaking people leaked to Russian reading people.

You state some common meme - undoubtedly regurgitated from a propaganda source.

You are indeed amazing......

It's good to agree