3 ms·

You answered your own question there. > The shameful thing is how little protest there's been from the established news media. > having published DNC and Pode

You answered your own question there. > The shameful thing is how little protest there's been from the established news media. > having published DNC and Podesta emails that put Clinton in a negative light. The media establishment doesn’t like it when you make them look bad. Surprise, surprise, they don’t care about Assange.

worldsayshi 6y ago
And then there's the dropped rape case that should have no relevance to this but likely manages to confuse the narrative around Assange.
- monocasa 6y ago
  They also tried to spread the rumor that he is a pedophile.
raverbashing 6y ago
Correct, and more to that, why would the press care? Did Assange expect anything else from the way he acted? You keep burning bridges you'll end up alone in an Island. Seems like Julian is having a case of LeopardsAteMyFace Manning and Assange do deserve protection from whistleblowing. Then Assange decided to take sides and kept digging a hole for himself.
- deathgrips 6y ago
  You antagonize every western country and then wonder why they treat you like an enemy. Assange suddenly screams "Wait, you still have to follow the rules!"
  - szczesniewski 6y ago
    Those rules are in place to protect people like Assange from prosecution. We need whistleblowers to protect from abuse. USA tries to be a world police, but in reality it can't even handle internal policing. American way, lock everyone up and no tolerance.
    - deathgrips 6y ago
      Assange isn't a whistleblower, he just tries to stir the pot of shit as best as he can. He has well documented anti-american sentiments and publishes his leaks without redacts to cause maximum loss of life and safety to Americans and American allies.
      - brmgb 6y ago
        WikiLeaks didn't leak documents without redacting them. They collaborated with multiple newspapers around the world to publish them in the most sensible way possible.
      - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
        The First Amendment is supposed to protect people with "anti-American" sentiments. After all, you don't need a Constitutional amendment to protect people the government likes. The whole point is to protect people the government wants to shut up. > to cause maximum loss of life and safety to Americans and American allies. Assange hoped that he could end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq by revealing the true nature of those wars. He thought he was saving lives.
  - monkeycantype 6y ago
    Assange didn't antagonise every western country, he antagonised powerful people in those countries. I think it's important for our own sanity to recognise that our government and it's intelligence agencies are not us, even though sometimes with will be aligned.
marvin 6y ago
They should care about the precedent. This is really about freedom of the press. A guy that’s universally disliked is the perfect subject for sliding the authoritarian ratchet.
- ceilingcorner 6y ago
  Have you watched the news in the last four years? Precedent doesn’t matter anymore. All that matters is that your side wins.

worldsayshi 6y ago

And then there's the dropped rape case that should have no relevance to this but likely manages to confuse the narrative around Assange.

monocasa 6y ago
They also tried to spread the rumor that he is a pedophile.

raverbashing 6y ago

Correct, and more to that, why would the press care? Did Assange expect anything else from the way he acted? You keep burning bridges you'll end up alone in an Island. Seems like Julian is having a case of LeopardsAteMyFace Manning and Assange do deserve protection from whistleblowing. Then Assange decided to take sides and kept digging a hole for himself.

deathgrips 6y ago
You antagonize every western country and then wonder why they treat you like an enemy. Assange suddenly screams "Wait, you still have to follow the rules!"
- szczesniewski 6y ago
  Those rules are in place to protect people like Assange from prosecution. We need whistleblowers to protect from abuse. USA tries to be a world police, but in reality it can't even handle internal policing. American way, lock everyone up and no tolerance.
  - deathgrips 6y ago
    Assange isn't a whistleblower, he just tries to stir the pot of shit as best as he can. He has well documented anti-american sentiments and publishes his leaks without redacts to cause maximum loss of life and safety to Americans and American allies.
    - brmgb 6y ago
      WikiLeaks didn't leak documents without redacting them. They collaborated with multiple newspapers around the world to publish them in the most sensible way possible.
    - DiogenesKynikos 6y ago
      The First Amendment is supposed to protect people with "anti-American" sentiments. After all, you don't need a Constitutional amendment to protect people the government likes. The whole point is to protect people the government wants to shut up. > to cause maximum loss of life and safety to Americans and American allies. Assange hoped that he could end the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq by revealing the true nature of those wars. He thought he was saving lives.
- monkeycantype 6y ago
  Assange didn't antagonise every western country, he antagonised powerful people in those countries. I think it's important for our own sanity to recognise that our government and it's intelligence agencies are not us, even though sometimes with will be aligned.

marvin 6y ago

They should care about the precedent. This is really about freedom of the press. A guy that’s universally disliked is the perfect subject for sliding the authoritarian ratchet.

ceilingcorner 6y ago
Have you watched the news in the last four years? Precedent doesn’t matter anymore. All that matters is that your side wins.