Julian Assange, Journalist or Criminal?

[Guest050619-1]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

"If" is the operative term.
However, it's Tucker Carlson's position that the only thing Assange did was embarrass powerful people. There is, per Carlson, the possibility that the U.S. won't be able to prove its case in a British court and extradition won't happen. I suspect Carlson may be right about the British judge quashing the extradition.

If they don't (turn him over to the US) do the Limeys turn him over to Sweden's law enforcement? (Isn't that the nation he still has a pending rape case?) Should Assange get Michael Avenatti to defend him.?....or does Mikey have other things on his mind these days....?

[Tiny]

Originally Posted by Chateau Becot

If they don't (turn him over to the US) do the Limeys turn him over to Sweden's law enforcement? (Isn't that the nation he still has a pending rape case?) Should Assange get Michael Avenatti to defend him.?....or does Mikey have other things on his mind these days....?

The Swedes dropped the rape investigation and the extradition request. But they may re-open the case. Two Swedish women accused Assange of rape. The statute of limitations expired on one of the accusations.

[dilbert firestorm]

Originally Posted by Chateau Becot

If they don't (turn him over to the US) do the Limeys turn him over to Sweden's law enforcement? (Isn't that the nation he still has a pending rape case?) Should Assange get Michael Avenatti to defend him.?....or does Mikey have other things on his mind these days....?

they might turn him over to the swedes. one of the victims lawyers is pushing the swede govt. to reopen the case.


it all depends on what the swedes decide to do.

[agrarian]

gfejunkie wrote this: Finally something both sides agree on. The Republicans hate him for exposing secret national intel. The dimretards hate him for helping to dash Shrillary's dreams.

Sorry to disrupt the happy exchange finally underway in a thread, but gfejunkie's statement bugs me. This is precisely the sort of black and white, all or nothing analysis that keeps divisiveness boiling and mindlessly promotes distinctions that do not extend to all on one side or the other. I will probably vote Democrat in the next election. I mostly vote Democrat. I happen to believe in the type of government we have, and sincerely hope our government can evolve to become more frugal, responsive and trustworthy, irrespective of which party controls the White House. I do not disdain government, but I do dislike those who exploit our government. I dislike Assange not because he harmed Clinton's campaign, but because he fucked with our national security, our government, and because he did it on more than one occasion. He is not a journalist, he is a malevolent, dangerous person. I hate the expression "dimtard" but I am in that camp, I suppose. Assange and others who follow his lead threaten all of us, Republicans and Democrats.

[agrarian]

Oh yeah...I also dislike Assange because he fucked with a political campaign for elected office in our great nation. He fucked with a process that is important and needs to be protected from foreign intervention and from the untoward efforts of people like Assange. We must cut him no slack, and we must cut no slack for those who supported Assange or solicited his illegal help.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Chateau Becot

If they don't (turn him over to the US) do the Limeys turn him over to Sweden's law enforcement? (Isn't that the nation he still has a pending rape case?) Should Assange get Michael Avenatti to defend him.?....or does Mikey have other things on his mind these days....?

The rape charges were dropped. It looks like he may get to go free if the Brits don't extradite him to the U.S.

Originally Posted by agrarian

gfejunkie wrote this: Finally something both sides agree on. The Republicans hate him for exposing secret national intel. The dimretards hate him for helping to dash Shrillary's dreams.

Sorry to disrupt the happy exchange finally underway in a thread, but gfejunkie's statement bugs me. This is precisely the sort of black and white, all or nothing analysis that keeps divisiveness boiling and mindlessly promotes distinctions that do not extend to all on one side or the other. I will probably vote Democrat in the next election. I mostly vote Democrat. I happen to believe in the type of government we have, and sincerely hope our government can evolve to become more frugal, responsive and trustworthy, irrespective of which party controls the White House. I do not disdain government, but I do dislike those who exploit our government. I dislike Assange not because he harmed Clinton's campaign, but because he fucked with our national security, our government, and because he did it on more than one occasion. He is not a journalist, he is a malevolent, dangerous person. I hate the expression "dimtard" but I am in that camp, I suppose. Assange and others who follow his lead threaten all of us, Republicans and Democrats.

What gfejunkie posted is exactly what you heard when the two parties were interviewed. The dims overwhelmingly voiced concern about their poor, poor hildebeest and the disgraced dim party. The Republicans were overwhelmingly concerned with national security.

[gnadfly]

Supposedly one of the women Julian raped was a spy sent to entrap him.

If he helped get President Kong elected and Criminal Hillery not, all I can say is "Thanks Mr Assange."

[I B Hankering]

.

Is Wikileaks Founder Julian Assange A Foreign Spy Or A News Publisher? Probably Both.

.... The notion Assange is a non-ideological warrior fighting to expose the “unvarnished truth” about all abusive governments—as The New York Times once claimed—is a myth.

That said, I’m also reflexively uncomfortable with the idea of the Department of Justice (DOJ) prosecuting publishers for disseminating classified documents. Without whistleblowers and illegal disclosures, governments would often get away with grievous abuses of power. Even if those leaks are politically motivated, and even if the release of those documents fail to offer proper context, in the long run, protecting journalistic institutions that pursue transparency is a net benefit for free society.

And let’s not kid ourselves, even if journalists don’t openly solicit stolen classified materials, they are implicitly hoping to get their hands on as much as possible. Everyone knows this. In 2017, Hollywood was still celebrating the uncompromising bravery of Washington Post journalists, who 50 years earlier had published the Pentagon Papers, which consisted of illegally stolen classified documents that exposed 30 years of American involvement in the Vietnam War....

It’s also worth noting that many journalists had a very different take on WikiLeaks before Assange allegedly undermined hildebeest’s chance in the 2016 presidential election by publishing John Podesta’s hacked DNC emails. WikiLeaks was often portrayed as a journalistic endeavor and worthy bulwark against government abuse.

(The Federalist)

[The_Waco_Kid]

Originally Posted by agrarian

Oh yeah...I also dislike Assange because he fucked with a political campaign for elected office in our great nation. He fucked with a process that is important and needs to be protected from foreign intervention and from the untoward efforts of people like Assange. We must cut him no slack, and we must cut no slack for those who supported Assange or solicited his illegal help.

if he had helped Clinton win you'd call him a hero. Remember, it doesn't matter who got Hillary's dirt, the Russkies, Assange, hackers or all of them, it was Hillary and DNC's dirt.


Pigs wallow in shitty dirt don't they? well Hillary the pig is the best there is, isn't she?

[Tiny]

From some recent press reports, one of Swedish women who alleged rape has asked the Swedish prosecutor to re-open its investigation into Assange, which was dropped because the Swedes had no chance of getting their hands on him while he was holed up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. There's a good chance this will happen. If it does, the United Kingdom will have competing requests from the USA and Sweden for extradition.

The most likely scenario then may be that the Brits send Assange to Sweden. They placate the Labor Party's left wing, some of whom believe Assange is a hero, without incurring the wrath of the Americans for letting him walk free. It may depend on which party is in power at the time the extradition hearing(s) comes to a head. If it's the Labor Party, I'd bet he gets deported to Australia or goes to Sweden.