No it doesn't. I can only hope he does something to damage the GOP's credibility just like he did Clinton's before this happens. I mean, he's terrible, but Wiki Leaks isn't inherently bad. After this past election, it just seems fair, anyway.
CNN: US prepares charges to seek arrest of Julian Assange
- Thread starter Chumley
- Start date
- Status
No it doesn't. I can only hope he does something to damage the GOP's credibility just like he did Clinton's before this happens. I mean, he's terrible, but Wiki Leaks isn't inherently bad. After this past election, it just seems fair, anyway.
Charging a foreign national not on US soil with sedition is a joke. For example, this would mean that if someone in the U.K. said 'fuck the US' then the US government should make you go to the US and go to jail for inciting inserruction against the established order?
Seems like an extremely dark path if true.
Seems like an extremely dark path if true.
obama's DoJ spox:
https://twitter.com/matthewamiller/status/855195785323057152
if they do this reporters will be next
assange is a shitty person but this isn't good
https://twitter.com/matthewamiller/status/855195785323057152
if they do this reporters will be next
assange is a shitty person but this isn't good
chromatic9
Member
They could bring in wasp nests then wait for him to run out or jump from the balcony.
My thought exactly. Just distributing the information is doing nothing that the news agencies didn't also do. Unless they genuinely did discover that Assange directly helped Snowden with the original breach (and I don't see how they could have) this is going to be some twisted reasoning,
DreadPirateRoberts
Member
It doesn't matter where he was, if the US arrests him he will be under our jurisdiction and the Constitution will apply.
I assume we'll sanction them.
Autoignition
Member
... Okay, that actually legitimately worries me. I was wondering when/how Trump was going to take down journalists, and for a while it started to seem like maybe he'd given up on doing so. This could be the opening of pandora's box.
People always want to shoot the messenger.
You'd think people in the US would be more concerned about the mass corruption in US politics and the behaviour of the CIA...than the person who shone a light on them. Whether Russia was behind the hacks/leaks or not...it doesn't change the facts that were in them.
Don't be corrupt and don't do corrupt things in the future...and hacks/leaks from Russia or whoever won't show corruption or cause harm to your reputations or election campaigns.
It seems people would rather their politicians and agencies stay corrupt ...and that they would rather be kept in the dark about it.
Tallshortman
Member
What? Saying "fuck the US" in the US is not a crime. The US has probably the most liberal free speech laws among western states.
Bruce Springsteen
Member
O'Reilly connected to them? Lol
Can you be specific about the corruption or the CIA behaviors that we should actually be concerned about?
Russian leaks and US corruption are now inextricably linked. As you will see in the coming months. And are you suggesting we should just pretend a hostile nation isn't attacking our institutions because the USA has bad people in it?
Ridiculously reductionist.
DerangedHermit
Member
Yep, this is their endgame.
SoulUnison
Banned
Yeah, I hate that phrasing.
"The Constitution was getting in the way, but we've found a way to sidestep it."
Whompa02
Member
I'm completely fine with this.
It prevents foreigners from releasing classified documents from our government...
It prevents foreigners from releasing classified documents from our government...
Justin Bailey
------ ------
I wonder if this is related to the Russia investigation.
nitekrawlwer
Member
If we have found new information that these actions are predicated upon, I will be happy about this. If the circumstances are the exact same as they were 6 months ago, I'm deeply worried.
It's up to you what concerns you.
If nothing in the leaked DNC emails or CIA information concerned you...then why does it matter if they were leaked anyway? If there's nothing bad there then nobody should be up in arms about it. I mean we know everyone hacks everyone anyway..and the US can't be that concerned otherwise they wouldn't be spending 90% of their cyber budget on attacks vs only 10% on defence.
Stumpokapow
listen to the mad man
Suppose there's nothing bad but because there's a high information cost of figuring out whether things are bad or not, people rely on elite interpreters (media outlets, twitter experts) to interpret the information for them, and those interpreters are cranks, and then a guy tries to shoot up a pizza store because ???? reddit ???? satanism ????
This isn't really relevant to the question at hand but it's an open question whether they apply to illegal immigrants (most people think the SC would say yes, they do... but it's technically still undecided).
You're literally posting in this thread to say that it's terrible that I'm not more concerned about these things, so this rings a bit hollow.
All I'm asking you is what, exactly, you're talking about. I assume that if you think these things are bad you'd have actual examples of what's bad about them. But it seems like you don't.
Uh...so just to be clear, your argument is:
* If there's nothing bad in the leaked stuff then Assange shouldn't be in trouble because nobody should care.
* If there's something bad in the leaked stuff then Assange shouldn't be in trouble because he was revealing important truths.
So basically your position is nobody should ever get in trouble for stealing files from the American government and publishing them regardless of the situation.
I think this position is pretty dumb.
Just_myles
Member
That's a real thing. A lot of bloggers and journos rely on it.
SlickShoesRUCrazy
Member
probably knows about the trump/putin collusion.
Dude is a goner.
Dude is a goner.
I can certainly see why those hacking them/stealing them should get in trouble if caught....I don't think those reporting them should be. Of course the CIA leaks came from an internal source anyway (or so it seems) and whistleblowing to the press is hardly new...nor is the press keeping their sources secret.
If Assange himself had hacked the CIA/DNC then he should be arrested and charged....but he didn't. He/Wikileaks simply printed what was leaked to him/them.
As far as what concerns me personally...well I suppose the biggest concern is the ability of the CIA to hack and leave fingerprints that suggest it was Russia/China etc who did it. You could start wars between nations that way ...if you were so inclined...or use it to set up a reason for your own country to go to war.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
So Wikileaks must surely point their sights at Trump now right?
About damn time they found a way to get him.
On the free speech thing. Likely already said but even free speech in the US isn't 100% free. You can't just say anything you want and think you'll be free of consequences.There are a number of conditions on that. For example you can't say anything that would directly lead to the harm of others and expect you'll be allowed to walk free. You can't yell fire or cause a panic in a room and think you can walk away after people are hurt or killed for example. No people have gone to jail for saying things that have gotten people directly killed. Assange has done far worse than that.
On the free speech thing. Likely already said but even free speech in the US isn't 100% free. You can't just say anything you want and think you'll be free of consequences.There are a number of conditions on that. For example you can't say anything that would directly lead to the harm of others and expect you'll be allowed to walk free. You can't yell fire or cause a panic in a room and think you can walk away after people are hurt or killed for example. No people have gone to jail for saying things that have gotten people directly killed. Assange has done far worse than that.
wikileaks is an outlet for publishing leaked documents, they don't obtain anything themselves
Assange has simply published material given to the organisation. If you're going down the path of prosecuting journalists and whistleblowers, it's a dangerous one. What precedent does it set? Especially when they're bringing to light unethical and immoral practices from a state actor or the state itself.
You can claim out of ignorance that Assange has done worse, but the reality is that the US government is the real issue here and has been ever since it decided to attack journalists and whistleblowers. A grand jury for Julian Assange? What a complete joke.
The article states they have new information that suggests Assange actively aided it collaborated with Snowden. The former Obama admin member qualified the statement with "...unless they found something new..." and it appears they have. Journalists don't normally help leakers obtain more info so assuming they are pursuing it this way I don't think this is going to impact free speech at all.
BoogieWoogie
Banned
Oh and I'm sure they haven't found anything on Trump at all.......
R10Neymarfan
Member
I hope not or I'll never heard the end of it from my friend. Assange is a hero and champion of transparency/privacy. So if something happens to him, my friend will go nuts.
Don't get me wrong Assange is a criminal and definite Russian shill but I just don't want these worshippers to go nuts.
Don't get me wrong Assange is a criminal and definite Russian shill but I just don't want these worshippers to go nuts.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Have you taken a look at their "fair and balanced" twitter account in the last year or two?
DreadPirateRoberts
Member
As far as the current legal precedent goes yes, they have the rights granted to persons but not citizens. the best example of that is the fifth and fourteenth amendments, they have rights under the fifth amendment, which is directed at persons. But less so under the fourteenth which is directed at citizens. Deportation is considered a civil matter not a criminal matter, which is why it can happen without much of a legal battle, the civil protections are in the fourteenth
But the supreme court can still always set new legal precedent.
i get that they have an agenda. what i'm saying is that they don't have staff that hacks various organizations to get documents. they're a leaker repository.
if they were themselves stealing the documents and then publishing them they could be prosecuted for the theft. they're not, so they're going to be prosecuted for publishing, which is extremely dangerous to first amendment freedoms.
Did you read the article? They have information regarding collaboration. This isn't for publishing.
how is it a violation of US law for a non-american entity staffed by people who aren't citizens of the US to collude with another foreign government?
Colluding with Snowden to commit crimes in the US.
If the rumored documents are real it indicates that Assange and Russia were co-conspirators in the theft of the NSA Data. They were seeking protection for Snowden before he even stole the documents.
evidence that the obama DoJ desperately and unsuccessfully worked to uncover for 6 years has been found by a new administration populated by conspiratorial nutjobs in 3 months
i remain skeptical
It would make sense if the Russia investigations led to it being shared between different agencies who may not have done so previously.
This stuff has been floating around for awhile now. If anything its why Obama continued to ignore requests for Snowden to be pardoned. Because it significantly changes the situation from Whistle Blower to potential Russian Agent.
It won't change a thing.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked