• IninewCrow
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1306 months ago

    Meanwhile, they have an orange beanbag presidential hopeful spilling the beans to the whoever around the world and he gets millions of dollars of support, literal legal immunity from anything and 1/3 of the country want him to become their Cheeto leader in Mountain Dew.

    • @disguy_ovahea
      link
      476 months ago

      That’s because that orange beanbag seated three associate justices of the Supreme Court, 54 judges for the courts of appeals, 174 district court judges, and three judges for the United States Court of International Trade.

      Even worse, citizens want to let him do it again.

      • @errer
        link
        English
        26 months ago

        To be fair, Biden has seated almost as many judges in his term, so that has balanced out at the lower levels. With the very important exception of the Supreme Court.

        • @disguy_ovahea
          link
          8
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          There’s also the important point of Biden not committing crimes, like those that the commenter mentioned, and having those charges heard by one of his own appointed judges. Appeals from Trump’s other cases can potentially end up with one of his appointed appeals court judges, or ultimately be heard by the newly conservative Supreme Court, as you pointed out.

          I mentioned it because that’s the notable difference between Assange’s and Trump’s ability to live above the law.

    • Track_Shovel
      link
      fedilink
      English
      206 months ago

      Please step into my secure toilet to see the nation’s secrets.

      I still can’t believe that fucking happened and people just go on ignoring it

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      Hey, to the positive, less than 1/3 of the country. First, if you look at vote numbers versus total population in previous elections, as well factoring in as the total population including those that can’t vote for various reasons. Then, factor in that the party of shit nazis is disenfranchising remaining R voters at lightning speed, the party is massively in debt in some states and basically ceasing to exist, more of the insurrectionists continue to go to prison, the rest of the crazies end up doing something stupid and get arrested…

      Things are looking up as that fraction heads towards 1/4 and hopefully they’ll go back into their stinky rotting little hole where they belong. Their Russian troll daddies just make the presence look larger and more present than they really are.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    826 months ago

    Good for him - he’s less innocent than folks like Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden but a heavy prosecution of him would definitely have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers. Did he release things at politically convenient times? Yes. Should that be illegal? Fuck no.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      336 months ago

      2016 Assange was a very different person than who he was in 2009. The espionage charges relating to the Chelsea Manning leaks were always bogus, but his involvement with the Trump campaign solidified him as a huge asshole in my mind.

      https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/11/14/563996442/donald-trump-jr-had-direct-contact-with-wikileaks-during-campaign

      Even back then, WikiLeaks was telling trump to claim the election was rigged and stolen. These are not the actions of a whistleblower, and it’s clear he was not a whistleblower (or working with whistleblowers) during this period and likely a mouthpiece for Russia to sow division in the US.

      • @Cosmonauticus
        link
        16
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Agreed. Assange is not the good guy in this. No one is in this.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      86 months ago

      but a heavy prosecution of him would definitely have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers

      As if the last decade plus of his life were not enough for that. Better than a life sentence, yeah.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    666 months ago

    Legendary. That’s him cleared in Sweden, UK, and the US. Apparently they’re considering letting him return to Australia (his home country) as well. Godspeed, Assange!

  • Flying Squid
    link
    316 months ago

    This is a real win for Biden. Despite all of Trump’s praise for Wikileaks, he did nothing about Assange.

    Of course, this wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t an election year, but it’s still a win.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      206 months ago

      In my opinion, absolutely. His legal exile lasted far too long… I think most people won’t even know this happened unless the late night shows pick it up.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        176 months ago

        I wonder how many people even remember who he is without a refresher at this point. The general public’s memory is short.

    • @return2ozmaOP
      link
      16 months ago

      If only our politicians fought as hard for things during the non-election years too.

      • androogee (they/she)
        link
        fedilink
        English
        13
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        This shit is so frustrating.

        YOU apathetic fuckers don’t PAY ATTENTION when it’s not an election year.

        Stuff is still happening when you aren’t looking at it.

        • @Cryophilia
          link
          16 months ago

          Apathetic voters are too stupid to have developed an understanding of object permanence yet.

  • @Suavevillain
    link
    256 months ago

    I’m glad he is finally free and I’m always thankful to anyone who exposes war crimes and whistleblowers.

  • @someguy3
    link
    116 months ago

    This seems like a big deal.

  • @TheBigBrother
    link
    7
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    If Assange wasn’t in US territory when revealed classified information, why is he being judged by the US?

    Was not the US should be judging the one/s who filtered the information and not who publish it?

    • sunzu
      link
      fedilink
      156 months ago

      u/@[email protected] explained how

      the reason is that the US can exercise such authority in practice with any consequences.

      a bigger concern here is his native government’s limp dick response tbh

      aint he from AU?

      • @FlowVoid
        link
        English
        4
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        the US can exercise such authority

        Many countries have the authority to prosecute crimes that occur on their soil even if the perpetrator is outside the country. Including Assange’s native country.

        The foreign interference crimes apply to conduct that occurs in Australia. So, if the perpetrator was in Australia at the time they engaged in interference, then prosecuting them would be relatively straightforward, provided there was sufficient evidence. If an offender is outside Australia at the time of the interference, they could still be charged with a crime.

        • sunzu
          link
          fedilink
          -16 months ago

          I don’t understand the point you are trying to make?

          AU is not prosecuting here

          • @FlowVoid
            link
            English
            4
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            The point is that the US is not unusual in prosecuting people in other countries. Australia and others do the same thing.

            • sunzu
              link
              fedilink
              -26 months ago

              Who did AU prosecute like this?

              Point I was making is that AU is failing to protect its citizen who is being harassed… BTW ;)

              • @FlowVoid
                link
                English
                4
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                Australia, like the US and other countries, does not generally shield suspected criminals from prosecution.

                And that’s regardless of whether the person is actually guilty. Just ask Amanda Knox.

    • @FlowVoid
      link
      English
      126 months ago

      Anyone involved in a crime committed on US soil can be charged with the crime.

      Do you suppose hacking your computer should be legal provided the hacker is in Russia?

        • @FlowVoid
          link
          English
          8
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          You can certainly be charged in Russia.

          Extradition is another matter.

      • @TheBigBrother
        link
        -8
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Assange personally hacked the alleged computer in US soil? Cos as I see it he published classified information from outside the US so my question would be, you can be judged for publish classified information of the US even if you are not a US citizen? As far as I know the person/s accountable for the crime are ones who probably right now are working for the US govt…

        • @FlowVoid
          link
          English
          3
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          The US alleges that Assange was part of a conspiracy to hack computers in the US, ie he was not just a passive receiver, he was involved in planning the hack.

          The superseding indictment alleges that Assange was complicit with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, in unlawfully obtaining and disclosing classified documents related to the national defense.  Specifically, the superseding indictment alleges that Assange  conspired with Manning;  obtained from Manning and aided and abetted her in obtaining classified information

          • sunzu
            link
            fedilink
            16 months ago

            Damn, do we have ourselves a glowie here lol

            • @FlowVoid
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              I didn’t say I think he is guilty. But the charges against him aren’t what everyone seems to think.

              • sunzu
                link
                fedilink
                -46 months ago

                Man… What is US trying to show here? That they can drum up fake charges on people?

                We got it! Nobody doubted it. We are all quacking in fear!

                It just looks pathetic at this point. Fuck it hound him some more! why do I give a fuck.

                It just looks like a desperate exercise of coercive power!

                • @FlowVoid
                  link
                  English
                  16 months ago

                  I don’t know what is going on here. On the one hand, I don’t trust Assange. On the other hand, I really don’t trust the Trump DoJ. Especially since they indicted Assange after the Obama DoJ concluded he hadn’t broken the law.

                  A trial would have been interesting.

        • sunzu
          link
          fedilink
          16 months ago

          Original allegations suggested that russian operatives supplied wikileaks with the docs

          • @TheBigBrother
            link
            -6
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            So it should be a problem with Russia, no?

            • sunzu
              link
              fedilink
              06 months ago

              I guess they committed the “crime” but how is US supposed to prosecute that with out looking limp dick?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      46 months ago

      US courts can still try him in absentia, i.e. if he’s not present in the courtroom.

      If he’s in a country with an extradition treaty with the US, e.g. the UK, he can be extradited to the US for the trial or with a conviction.

      • @FlowVoid
        link
        English
        4
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        No, the SCOTUS has made clear that you cannot be tried in abstentia.

        This case requires us to decide whether Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43 permits the trial in absentia of a defendant who absconds prior to trial and is absent at its beginning. We hold that it does not.

  • Autonomous User
    link
    English
    7
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    Great seeing far more sensible comments here compared with c/technology

    Always suprising to see more on a whistle blower than the guys that actually did the war crime.

  • @Toto
    link
    -196 months ago

    deleted by creator

    • sunzu
      link
      fedilink
      -3
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      why so much downvote…

      This is right, right thing to do and the motive called out is likely true…

      If you disagree, please state your reasoning.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Merrick Garland and his DOJ are absolutely not taking marching orders from the Whitehouse. Garland also doesn’t give two shits about politics. Dude’s rigidly ethical

      • @credo
        link
        7
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        You’re right, the President should basically do nothing in the year before an election. Everything must be accomplished in the first three years, then we take a break.

        Edit: (Assuming POTUS was even involved)

      • sunzu
        link
        fedilink
        06 months ago

        I guess a lot of people just got feelz about this one lol

      • mad_asshatter
        link
        -14
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Lemmy dogpiles much more than reddit ever does. All one can do is upvote but it’s moot.

        Downvotes should max out at 5.

        eta:

        pud(proof)ding

        • magnetosphere
          link
          fedilink
          16 months ago

          Unenforceable wish: no limit on downvotes, but people should have to EXPLAIN them. I often learn more from opposing opinions than from statements of agreement. If I say something unpopular, I want to know WHY it’s so widely disliked. Maybe I’m unaware of something important.

          • @ccunning
            link
            26 months ago

            Forced troll feeding. Brilliant idea…

            • magnetosphere
              link
              fedilink
              2
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              lol good point. I’m a goddam genius!

              Ironically, your reply is what I’m talking about. Tell me why I’m wrong! Point out what I missed!

              • @ccunning
                link
                26 months ago

                Just saw your edit…

                …but I did explain…

                …so I’m confused…

                • magnetosphere
                  link
                  fedilink
                  26 months ago

                  It’s ironic because thoughtful criticism is helpful. The “tell me why I’m wrong” bit is a remark meant for others, not you.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            06 months ago

            I’m pretty sure that sometimes it’s a result of how the voter feels. Other times i’m not so convinced it’s humans voting.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              5
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              All this extended conversation about all the downvotes and not a single person responded to the reason I gave for downvoting right up there. Merrick Garland’s DOJ absolutely does not care about politics, and the implication that this guilty plea has to do with the Biden Admin wanting to influence the election in November is fictional.

              • @ccunning
                link
                1
                edit-2
                6 months ago

                As of now 19 folks responded with upvotes. The lack of comments is because you nailed it and nothing else needed to be said.