I continue to think quoting the word "vibrant" without the end of the sentence is badly misleading. I mean, he's talking about whether Russia has Wikileaks-equi

I continue to think quoting the word "vibrant" without the end of the sentence is badly misleading. I mean, he's talking about whether Russia has Wikileaks-equivalents, and you answer that it's different from the US because the biggest leakers and critics are in prison or exile? The analogy to Manning and Snowden makes itself... Yes, Assange is soft on Russia and Trump (and apparently Roger stone just copped again to a Trump-Assange connection). No, it wouldn't surprise me even a little bit if he's looking to the Kremlin for leaks and protection, and so publishing at their discretion. Yes, Russia clearly engages in censorship and violence against critics on a level not at all comparable to the US. (The Manning/Snowden comparison on "in prison" is obvious, but I do realize the difference. The US doesn't have an epidemic of murdered journalists and civil rights advocates in exile, and wealth and fame aren't required to survive dissent.) But because I worry about all of that, I wish the discussion of the topic wasn't so often allergic to context. Most articles and public statements on the issue are easily shredded for horrible inaccuracies, when even a straightforward summary of events is deeply alarming.