4 ms·

Lying about a war for corrupt reasons surely qualifies.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 8y ago
No, it doesn't. It certainly qualifies as official malfeasance, but treason in the US is defined narrowly in the Constitution (as an express reaction against “treason” being expansively applied.)
- resters 8y ago
  What better way to give aid to our enemies than to conduct an expensive war on false pretenses and illegally classify information that would have likely led to public distaste for the war? Imagine if the leaks showed that the officials wasted money in some other way such as taking gold reserves and destroying them in a nuclear explosion, or sending gold reserves to cronies in other nations. Theft is theft. Our enemies arguably want us to waste money on unnecessary wars. The officials exposed by Assange were acting in concert with our enemies.
  - gamblor956 8y ago
    What better way to give aid to our enemies than to conduct an expensive war on false pretenses and illegally classify information that would have likely led to public distaste for the war? Giving money to our enemies would be a better way to give them aid. Or weapons. Or supplies. Or pretty much anything, really. One thing which is not giving aid to our enemies is to fight a war against them, on whatever pretenses, which results in massive quantities of said enemy's soldiers dying. That's almost exactly the opposite of "aiding" our enemies. You may disagree with the efficiency of our military expenditures, but inefficiency in prosecuting military action is not even remotely the same thing as providing aid to our enemies.
    - resters 8y ago
      You miss the point of my comment. The group our politicians call enemies may or may not be. If we have actual enemies, we can be sure that they want us to waste as much money as possible on futile wars. If we have actual enemies, we can be sure that they want our leaders to circumvent the Democratic process to steal money that could be spent on domestic programs or returned to taxpayers and instead spend it on pointless wars. I’d we have enemies, we can be sure they want our leaders to spend billions making us hate, fear, and mistrust brown people, and crave strong man leaders over pluralism and liberty. Assange revealed that our leaders are acting in concert with such enemies. We can’t separate the lies from the theft. The lies about the war and the illegally classified info that the war logs revealed are what make the theft of resources possible. All the lives lost are of course also a major issue but the theft aspect makes it easier to see what a sacrifice we were all forced to make to wage the wars.
      - gamblor956 8y ago
        Literally everything you said is alt-right conspiracy nonsense. People who blow up Americans are our enemies. They brag about being our enemies online and in traditional media, at least until we blow them up using very expensive bombs. These wars were authorized by duly elected legislative representatives at the behest of multiple ideologically-opposing executive administrations. One of these presidents was a black/brown man, who spent his time in office addressing racial tensions. The other, more recent president--the one inflaming racial tensions--received political assistance from Assange, who openly admits to choosing to spread DNC leaks harmful to Clinton and choosing not to publish any negative documents about Trump, despite having access to a plethora of such documents. Assange revealed nothing, except that he's just as petty and partisan as everyone else, and just as capable of lies as the politicians he claimed he was trying to take down.
        resters 8y ago
        It's bizarre to have my views characterized as alt-right. > People who blow up Americans are our enemies. The groups doing those things have been funded by the US government quite recently, and would likely not exist if the US government hadn't tried to meddle in the middle east decades ago. > These wars were authorized by duly elected legislative representatives Sort of. The wars would likely not have escalated if the information in the Iraq war logs was known earlier. The war logs showed that the US classified information about what was actually going on in the war so that the public would continue to support it. If the American people knew that it was a proxy war against Iran and that the US was abetting war crimes against former Baath party members, it is unlikely that the war would have continued. > at the behest of multiple ideologically-opposing executive administrations. If you think the major parties are in disagreement on war related issues you are not paying close attention. There are only minor points of disagreement. > openly admits to choosing to spread DNC leaks harmful to Clinton and choosing not to publish any negative documents about Trump, despite having access to a plethora of such documents. Assange's decision not to publish material related to Trump was based on it already having been widely published or based on its questionable authenticity. Do you really think that anything damning about Trump could have been kept secret? I think that sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory :) > Assange revealed nothing I'm not sure if you have read the war logs, but there was significant information revealed that should make the American people quite angry, both about the loss of life caused by the wars and the massive amount of money wasted on the wars. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost an amount equal to a 50% tax cut for all Americans earning under $500K for seven years in a row. The amount of suffering caused by the misallocation of funds (which Assange helped expose) is monumental.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

No, it doesn't. It certainly qualifies as official malfeasance, but treason in the US is defined narrowly in the Constitution (as an express reaction against “treason” being expansively applied.)

resters 8y ago
What better way to give aid to our enemies than to conduct an expensive war on false pretenses and illegally classify information that would have likely led to public distaste for the war? Imagine if the leaks showed that the officials wasted money in some other way such as taking gold reserves and destroying them in a nuclear explosion, or sending gold reserves to cronies in other nations. Theft is theft. Our enemies arguably want us to waste money on unnecessary wars. The officials exposed by Assange were acting in concert with our enemies.
- gamblor956 8y ago
  What better way to give aid to our enemies than to conduct an expensive war on false pretenses and illegally classify information that would have likely led to public distaste for the war? Giving money to our enemies would be a better way to give them aid. Or weapons. Or supplies. Or pretty much anything, really. One thing which is not giving aid to our enemies is to fight a war against them, on whatever pretenses, which results in massive quantities of said enemy's soldiers dying. That's almost exactly the opposite of "aiding" our enemies. You may disagree with the efficiency of our military expenditures, but inefficiency in prosecuting military action is not even remotely the same thing as providing aid to our enemies.
  - resters 8y ago
    You miss the point of my comment. The group our politicians call enemies may or may not be. If we have actual enemies, we can be sure that they want us to waste as much money as possible on futile wars. If we have actual enemies, we can be sure that they want our leaders to circumvent the Democratic process to steal money that could be spent on domestic programs or returned to taxpayers and instead spend it on pointless wars. I’d we have enemies, we can be sure they want our leaders to spend billions making us hate, fear, and mistrust brown people, and crave strong man leaders over pluralism and liberty. Assange revealed that our leaders are acting in concert with such enemies. We can’t separate the lies from the theft. The lies about the war and the illegally classified info that the war logs revealed are what make the theft of resources possible. All the lives lost are of course also a major issue but the theft aspect makes it easier to see what a sacrifice we were all forced to make to wage the wars.
    - gamblor956 8y ago
      Literally everything you said is alt-right conspiracy nonsense. People who blow up Americans are our enemies. They brag about being our enemies online and in traditional media, at least until we blow them up using very expensive bombs. These wars were authorized by duly elected legislative representatives at the behest of multiple ideologically-opposing executive administrations. One of these presidents was a black/brown man, who spent his time in office addressing racial tensions. The other, more recent president--the one inflaming racial tensions--received political assistance from Assange, who openly admits to choosing to spread DNC leaks harmful to Clinton and choosing not to publish any negative documents about Trump, despite having access to a plethora of such documents. Assange revealed nothing, except that he's just as petty and partisan as everyone else, and just as capable of lies as the politicians he claimed he was trying to take down.
      - resters 8y ago
        It's bizarre to have my views characterized as alt-right. > People who blow up Americans are our enemies. The groups doing those things have been funded by the US government quite recently, and would likely not exist if the US government hadn't tried to meddle in the middle east decades ago. > These wars were authorized by duly elected legislative representatives Sort of. The wars would likely not have escalated if the information in the Iraq war logs was known earlier. The war logs showed that the US classified information about what was actually going on in the war so that the public would continue to support it. If the American people knew that it was a proxy war against Iran and that the US was abetting war crimes against former Baath party members, it is unlikely that the war would have continued. > at the behest of multiple ideologically-opposing executive administrations. If you think the major parties are in disagreement on war related issues you are not paying close attention. There are only minor points of disagreement. > openly admits to choosing to spread DNC leaks harmful to Clinton and choosing not to publish any negative documents about Trump, despite having access to a plethora of such documents. Assange's decision not to publish material related to Trump was based on it already having been widely published or based on its questionable authenticity. Do you really think that anything damning about Trump could have been kept secret? I think that sounds a bit like a conspiracy theory :) > Assange revealed nothing I'm not sure if you have read the war logs, but there was significant information revealed that should make the American people quite angry, both about the loss of life caused by the wars and the massive amount of money wasted on the wars. The Iraq and Afghanistan wars have cost an amount equal to a 50% tax cut for all Americans earning under $500K for seven years in a row. The amount of suffering caused by the misallocation of funds (which Assange helped expose) is monumental.