LOL djohn tryna get cred back.
TSA roots for criminals. My goodness.
LOL djohn tryna get cred back.
Espionage. Called it. It would be on the table for anyone associated with Wikileaks.
poor fella thought this had something to do with the election
These indictments have something to do with getting people killed. Surely you don’t think Assange won’t talk so he won’t serve 170 years?
What’s something he might try to do for a lighter sentence if convicted?
Btw. Who said he wouldn’t be charged separately? these charges are separate from the last ones
Why?
For the simple fact you like to root for the enemy or is there something more behind your support?
You want to go on record here - and say that Assange
will NEVER get more indictments based on the election?
What do possible future indictments based on the election have to do with djohn thinking these indictments were based on the election?
Tried to find a dunced down thread for you
And does the press ever inform the government that they are going with the story, give us a reason to hold back?
answer: yes
Has the press in the US ever held back stories based on the response of the government as to why it should not be published?
answer: yes
That particular article covers a minuscule amount of what was released.
Wiki leaks did absolutely NOT have people under their employ who actually understand the nature of US relationships with other countries.
This is why the government does lend an ear to real news organizations. Not bulk release stolen data decided by one individual.
did you read the indictment?
I did. Did you? Because that’s exactly what happens
Under the DOJ's theory, receiving and publishing classified material is prosecutable as espionage. Journos aren't wrong to be concerned.
Lol passing off other people's tweets -- verbatim --as your own take.
Last edited by Winehole23; 05-24-2019 at 12:04 AM.
Except Assange is and never was a journalist. Unless they instructed and assisted in the hacking of classified material they really have no business being concerned
Good to see djohn still alive
Assange doesn't have to be a "real" journalist to have 1st Amendment protections,
Fwiw, the Obama DOJ considered prosecuting Assange under the Espionage Act but declined to do so because they could see no way to do it that wouldn't put legit journalists at risk.
In this case, assisting a hostile adversary to harm US national security doesn’t get him 1st amendment protections. And yes The Obama administration considered it.
Face it: Trump is prosecuting Assange for showing up the USG and US Armed forces as liars and war criminals during the Iraq War.
If he succeeds, hard to imagine he wouldn't sic Barr on the fake news media next.
Where does it say this? Other than the tweet you copied.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)