4 ms·

Remember when they smeared Assange as a Russian asset because they published the DNC and Podesta emails? Kind of hard for them to back him now. What a tangled

Remember when they smeared Assange as a Russian asset because they published the DNC and Podesta emails? Kind of hard for them to back him now. What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.

srtjstjsj 6y ago
You can be both a foreign asset and a journalist. If the US government is good, then conspiring with it's enemies to discredit the US would be wrong. But if the US government is bad, well, the US government has no moral right to prosecute, but that doesn't matter from a power perspective. There's no legal way to fix a broken legal system, just as an inconsistent logical system can't overcome itself.
- whatshisface 6y ago
  >There's no legal way to fix a broken legal system, just as an inconsistent logical system can't overcome itself. Legal systems are not actually that rigid, see for example the long tradition of SCOTUS overturning case precedent including their own. See also the large number of elected judges in the US, who could be replaced directly by people.
klyrs 6y ago
> Kind of hard for them to back him now. Weird how we've gone from expecting journalists to cover multiple sides of a story to this. And by weird I mean horrifying
eternalban 6y ago
> What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. You mean ends don't justify means? That has proven to be a hardsell to ideologues. Principle moral failing of the modern man is adopting this 'universal moral and ethical waiver' as their guiding light (regardless of affected ideological garb).
mhh__ 6y ago
If they use you are you an asset or just a cog in a gear? Did they ever disclose where they were from or their communications with the source?
dralley 6y ago
Yeah, that's not why. The "why" is because Assange has repeatedly (2010 and 2017) received leaks from within the Russian government, and refused to publish them. On one occasion having gone silent shortly before landing a job hosting a show for Russia Today. And also claimed to have documents about Trump, which he has also never published. https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... https://apnews.com/article/af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d https://apnews.com/article/af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d
- seattledev 6y ago
  The idea that he has info on Trump he didn't publish is ridiculous. Assange is not the only person on the planet capable of leaking information, and the entirety of the US media establishment would have clamored for the opportunity. If the information really existed, someone else would have leaked it. The only people "claiming" this are random people on the internet with a rage boner against Assange.

srtjstjsj 6y ago

You can be both a foreign asset and a journalist. If the US government is good, then conspiring with it's enemies to discredit the US would be wrong. But if the US government is bad, well, the US government has no moral right to prosecute, but that doesn't matter from a power perspective. There's no legal way to fix a broken legal system, just as an inconsistent logical system can't overcome itself.

whatshisface 6y ago
>There's no legal way to fix a broken legal system, just as an inconsistent logical system can't overcome itself. Legal systems are not actually that rigid, see for example the long tradition of SCOTUS overturning case precedent including their own. See also the large number of elected judges in the US, who could be replaced directly by people.

klyrs 6y ago

> Kind of hard for them to back him now. Weird how we've gone from expecting journalists to cover multiple sides of a story to this. And by weird I mean horrifying

eternalban 6y ago

> What a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive. You mean ends don't justify means? That has proven to be a hardsell to ideologues. Principle moral failing of the modern man is adopting this 'universal moral and ethical waiver' as their guiding light (regardless of affected ideological garb).

mhh__ 6y ago

If they use you are you an asset or just a cog in a gear? Did they ever disclose where they were from or their communications with the source?

dralley 6y ago

Yeah, that's not why. The "why" is because Assange has repeatedly (2010 and 2017) received leaks from within the Russian government, and refused to publish them. On one occasion having gone silent shortly before landing a job hosting a show for Russia Today. And also claimed to have documents about Trump, which he has also never published. https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-leaks-on-russian-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/17/wikileaks-turned-down-l... https://apnews.com/article/af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d https://apnews.com/article/af39586daf254cddb3d955453c45865d

seattledev 6y ago
The idea that he has info on Trump he didn't publish is ridiculous. Assange is not the only person on the planet capable of leaking information, and the entirety of the US media establishment would have clamored for the opportunity. If the information really existed, someone else would have leaked it. The only people "claiming" this are random people on the internet with a rage boner against Assange.