Wikileaks founder and good North man Julian Assange

[ferball]

A Grand Jury.

Good summary from 2018 here courtesy of CNBC:

Leonard Peltier and Mumia Abu Jamal like this.

 

[Chadwiko]

Leonard Peltier and Mumia Abu Jamal like this.

Neither were indicted by a Grand Jury so I'm unsure of the point you think you're making?

 

[ferball]

It's not. I've specifically said multiple times that I am happy he's free, that exposing war crimes was good, etc.

I'm just specifically pushing back against ferb's tangent that Hillary/DNC being shitty to Bernie somehow exonerates the role Assange and WikiLeaks played in the Russian election interference saga.

So what you're saying is no one should ever have known about Clinton's own "election interference" in the nomination process before the 2016 election and that if the ends justify it the public should be kept in ignorance of politicians malfeasance and conspiracies to gain power.

Cos none of this stuff is lies.

The DNC apologised and Debbie Wassername resigned in disgrace.

 

[DesertRoo]

So what you're saying is no one should ever have known about Clinton's own "election interference" in the nomination process before the 2016 election and that if the ends justify it the public should be kept in ignorance of politicians malfeasance and conspiracies to gain power.

Cos none of this stuff is lies.

The DNC apologised and Debbie Wassername resigned in disgrace.

But Hilary didn’t win…

 

[Chadwiko]

So what you're saying is...

No, that's pretty clearly not what I'm saying. Please slowly re-read what I wrote.

 

[Makeshift Park]

Grand jury indictments are farcical.

its a piece of cake to convince a bunch of laypeople that someone is bad when none of your arguments have to be held to proper scrutiny.

 

[Chadwiko]

Grand jury indictments are farcical.

I disagree.

 

[Makeshift Park]

I disagree.

There’s a good reason why NY’s chief judge made the observation district attorneys could convince a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich.

Even the American judiciary can see it’s an appalling system.

 

[ferball]

Neither were indicted by a Grand Jury so I'm unsure of the point you think you're making?

You expect people to trust the US judicial system ... lol okay... you do that.

 

[ferball]

No, that's pretty clearly not what I'm saying. Please slowly re-read what I wrote.

You're saying the role Assange played in releasing the emails that showed Hilary conspiring to prevent a fair and reasonable nomination process doesn't exonerate him from the role he played in exposing Hilary conspiring to to prevent a fair and reasonable nomination process

... because Russia.

That's it. All of it ... the sum total of your argument.

 

[Chadwiko]

That's it. All of it ... the sum total of your argument.

If that's what you think, then there isn't much point continuing this topic of discussion. You appear to be struggling to grasp the premise.

 

[ferball]

No, I don't think that was wrong at all.

This sums up my feelings pretty much perfectly;

I'm wondering what happened to Ol' Pos given the unwarranted shit he copped for some of the things he's done over the years.

The other objection I have with this is the idea that he's "suffered enough" ... what did he do to deserve that suffering?

He's suffered too much, not just for exposing war crimes either. For exposing the rotten heart of the 21st century US political establishment and its relationship with MIC and the extraordinary cynical grift they pull at the cost of the lives of mostly innocent people around the world.

If only there was some thread still open where we could discuss that.

 

[ferball]

If that's what you think, then there isn't much point continuing this topic of discussion. You appear to be struggling to grasp the premise.

Well spell it out then. Be explicit. Pretend i'm stupid(er than you already think I am.)

But remember that if you mean "Russian interference in the election" ... well there was no actual Russian interference in the election. People voted free of Russian interference. They made their own decisions. (Apart from the people mind controlled by Cambridge Analytica I spose.)

The point you're missing here is that ... deliberate Russian election interference designed to damage the Democratic candidate in order to assist Donald Trump's campaign consisted of exposing her actions to the public. That's how she was damaged.

It seems to me that Assange's involvement in that so called election interference consisted of providing American voters with facts that enabled them to make a more informed decision about the candidates than they would have been able to make without his involvement in that so called interference.

Can you enlighten me as to what else I've missed?

 

[Tas]

Well spell it out then. Be explicit. Pretend i'm stupid(er than you already think I am.)

But remember that if you mean "Russian interference in the election" ... well there was no actual Russian interference in the election. People voted free of Russian interference. They made their own decisions. (Apart from the people mind controlled by Cambridge Analytica I spose.)

The point you're missing here is that ... deliberate Russian election interference designed to damage the Democratic candidate in order to assist Donald Trump's campaign consisted of exposing her actions to the public. That's how she was damaged.

It seems to me that Assange's involvement in that so called election interference consisted of providing American voters with facts that enabled them to make a more informed decision about the candidates than they would have been able to make without his involvement in that so called interference.

Can you enlighten me as to what else I've missed?

Unveiling the truth is interference, Americans are the most brainwashed people on the planet, be they FOX brainwashed or MSNBC/CNN brainwashed. A journalist publishing the ACTUAL truth is a threat to their Republic.

 

[Chadwiko]

Well spell it out then. Be explicit. Pretend i'm stupid(er than you already think I am.)

But remember that if you mean "Russian interference in the election" ... well there was no actual Russian interference in the election.

I have no interest in playing your game.

I can sit here and explain there was Russian interference in the election and that numerous Russian intelligence operatives and Trump campaign staff were indicted, tried, and convicted over it...
... but it's pointless to raise these facts with you because you put on a tin foil hat and just dismiss the entire US Justice System as untrustworthy.

I can sit here and ask you to justify how the DNC allocating all their resources and efforts for Hillary equates to them "rigging the election" for her, but the Trump campaign illegally colluding with Russia to harm the Democratic campaign and sow discord and enmity among Democratic voters doesn't meet your threshold for "election interference"...
...but it's pointless to challenge your hypocrisy because you will just deny the facts of the cases at hand that don't suit your agenda.

There's literally no point in discussing these matters if you unilaterally dismiss the mountains of evidence and convictions simply because you think America is bad and Russia is good.

 

[The Warlord]

So what you're saying is no one should ever have known about Clinton's own "election interference" in the nomination process before the 2016 election and that if the ends justify it the public should be kept in ignorance of politicians malfeasance and conspiracies to gain power.

Cos none of this stuff is lies.

The DNC apologised and Debbie Wassername resigned in disgrace.

For mine the real US election interference was in 2020 when the DNC knifed Bernie

 

[The Warlord]

Grand jury indictments are farcical.

its a piece of cake to convince a bunch of laypeople that someone is bad when none of your arguments have to be held to proper scrutiny.

Yep, stupid system.

 

[The Warlord]

Unveiling the truth is interference, Americans are the most brainwashed people on the planet, be they FOX brainwashed or MSNBC/CNN brainwashed. A journalist publishing the ACTUAL truth is a threat to their Republic.

Preach Tas

 

[The Warlord]

There's literally no point in discussing these matters if you unilaterally dismiss the mountains of evidence and convictions simply because you think America is bad and Russia is good.

Wait til you find out about what discussing Ukraine is like with you lol

 

[giantroo]

 

[DesertRoo]

People who still believe guccifer gave Wikileaks the docs in the most surveilled place on the planet?
I’ve got a bridge to sell you

Guccifer 2.0: Evidence Versus GRU Attribution

 

[Chadwiko]

Yeah I'm not engaging with someone who believes the (frankly disgusting) Seth Rich conspiracies and outright denies the established facts of the Russian interference.

 

[DesertRoo]

Hmmm who to believe cryptographically signed meta data which anyone can look at or muller who couldn’t stand by his report once it was questioned..

 

[The Warlord]

This is why we need Assange and types like him.

 

[The Warlord]

I have no interest in playing your game.

I can sit here and explain there was Russian interference in the election and that numerous Russian intelligence operatives and Trump campaign staff were indicted, tried, and convicted over it...
... but it's pointless to raise these facts with you because you put on a tin foil hat and just dismiss the entire US Justice System as untrustworthy.

This is the key man. Ferbs and the rest of us don't need you to "explain" anything.

Disagreeing with you doesn't mean we don't understand the issue. You don't have to patronise and speak slowly.

People just hold a different view, you may think that's wrong, that's fine. It's not your role to "correct" or "challenge" what you perceive as "disinformation" here, this isn't ****ing parliament bro.

The issue isn't that you reflexively support the US security state narrative, that's fine.

It isn't even that you somehow believe you're a big ol' lefty while also always maintaining the hard right US security state narrative.

It's your relentless centering of yourself as the only sane/sensible person and dismissing of any other view that dares break the official US security state narrative as wrong/dangerous/Russian disinformation.

And then when anyone dares to take you to task on that, you immediatley become vituperatively personal and engage in naked trolling tactics to shut down discussions.

Me and DesertRoo disagree on stuff, me and ferball disagree on stuff, on the old thread that you got shut down because people wouldn't meekly accept that Big Brane Chad Is Right and accept what you EXPLAIN to us as fact, people disagreed all the time and just got on with it.

People will disagree with Big Brane Chad - that's life. And Big Brane Chad needs to accept that he's not the centre of the universe and what he thinks/believes is not the unadulterated truth and that everyone who disagrees is some form of intellectual heretic who must be hounded relentlessly.

Chill man, just chill.