No, all he has done is expose the crimes and malfeasance of our government and other governments in the world. He is the Whistleblower Supreme, even as you drink heavily from the cup of government and corporate propagandists.
Only one of us in denial and it is not me! Your posts reflect a failure to research the relevant subject matter which is why you are slinging around nonsensical terms like "kangaroo court" without any objective substantiation. The NY Times is protected by the 1st Amendment up to the point that it does not provide classified information to our enemies that would jeopardize the lives of Americans. https://www.freedomforuminstitute.org/first-amendment-center/primers/leaks-and-the-media/ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/07/...imes-decides-when-to-publish-leaked-news.html In essence exposing government corruption is legal. Exposing national intelligence that would harm American citizens is illegal.
The information classified as "Top Secret" is no longer secrete once secrecy is breached. If information is in the public domain - in any way shape or form it is preposterous nonsense to claim that this information is still "Secret" never mind "Top Secret. What "Top Secret" information was contained in the DNC hack by the way ? That Hillary/DNC meddled with our electoral process is information that represents a national security threat. You are making up gibberish and pretending that has a factual basis. Obviously Assange is not protected by Whistleblower legislation as he is not a US citizen. More preposterous gibberish on your part in a desperate attempt to avoid dealing with the real issues here.
It is you that can't seem to read your own links. What information related to national defense did Assange release. Further - what information did Assange release that was not already out there ? Then you state a complete falsehood by saying I did not provide any substantiation with respect to our justice system acting as "Kangaroo court" despite the fact that I provided you numerous examples - and you did not refute any of these examples. Since this substantiation was provided to you - it is a disingenuous joke for you to now claim that this was not provided. Lame -o - Rama.
The foot stomping hissyfoot denialism and strawman drivel above does not refute any of the FACTUAL content that I provided. Furthermore ANYONE who is subjected to US legal jurisdiction is AUTOMATICALLY qualified to any Constitutional PROTECTIONS of their rights which would INCLUDE whistleblower and/or 1A rights if they are applicable. However they do NOT apply because he is neither a whistleblower NOT a journalist. That you obviously don't know any of this says volumes.
Obviously you do NOT know the stark difference between information that is classified for the purposes of concealing government corruption and information that is classified because it could result in harm to Americans. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...d727b644a0b_story.html?utm_term=.aac5cc8b1d83 https://www.theguardian.com/media/2...-of-secret-cia-documents-hacking-surveillance That you are patently UNAWARE of what Assange has done to cause SERIOUS HARM to both our nation and We the People says volumes. Your puerile "lame-o-rama" ad hom is duly noted and ignored for derogatory reasons.
Only in your mind DT, and the minds of government bureaucrats and talking heads, has the material released by Wikileaks, Assange, Manning, Snowden and other whistleblowers done serious harm to this country. Pure poppycock. You believe everything you are told by the presstitute media and its talking heads, no questions asked. I am very much the opposite--I believe precious little of what the MSM offers, and I see whistleblowers as the life blood of what's left of a democracy in this country.
So according to you Assange mindlessly releasing classified information about the CIA does NOT put America and/or our citizens in any danger whatsoever?
My position is that any person or organization that exposes the crimes of the government does his civic duty with that act. And on the other hand, those in government responsible for committing military aggression and other crimes should be prosecuted. The crooks are the bad guys, and the whistleblowers are the good guys.
What alleged "crimes" was the CIA guilty of committing in the classified documents that Assange released?
Not just the CIA. Many branches. Put "collateral murder" in you Google Machine to refresh your memory, if it's still there.
Now you are just transferring your characteristics on to me. I have not ignored any content you have provided. It is you that failed to address plethora of evidence provided with respect to our Kangaroo Justice system. Unable to handle this reality your mind is in desperate denial. Tell your "anyone in US legal jurisdiction" story to Enemy Combatants and 2) Whistleblower protections do not extend to everyone. Freedom of speech applies to more than just Whistle blowers and Journalists - how desperate you are to trash the Constitution, the founding principles, the rule of law and "Classical Liberalism" in general. Perhaps you should move over to the religious right camp - as your denial is akin to that of some religious extremist when they encounter information or ideas that conflict with religious belief. (and I am not joking nor trying to be funny)
It is the CIA who is "harming" Americans - Not Assange. It is the CIA's actions with respect to Hacking that is harming Americans - which is why people risked their personal safety to smuggle information out. Assange didn't smuggle the information out. Assange took information which had already been smuggled out and made that information available to the general public. It is you that can not seem to figure out what something Classified as "Top Secret" means. Obviously the secrecy had been breached once the information was smuggled out of the CIA .. the information is no longer secret. This information would have been available on the dark web for all criminal organizations to see. The harm had already been done when the information was smuggle out. Your complaint is based on the CIA being embarrassed by the smuggled information going "more public". The idea that every hacker worth his/her salt on the planet would not have known this information had Assange not released it nonsense. "Obviously" the person who gave the information to Assange wanted the info released publicly. "Obviously" the person did not give Assange the only copy of this information. "Obviously" if Assange had not released the information - and the person wanted this information released - that person would have used other channels - such as the dark web. The information is out there - regardless of whether or not Assange makes this information available to the general public.
Well, I certainly wouldn't disagree WikiLeaks revealing DNC and Podesta emails. No National Security secrets in there.
More kneejerk denialism of factual reality, asinine strawmen and puerile ad homs noted for the record. Since that is all you have left you have effectively DISQUALIFIED yourself from any further meaningful interaction on this topic as far as I am concerned. Have a nice day!
That is a WAR crime. We were discussing crimes committed by the government. That you cannot provide any says volumes.
At least you seem to have finally figured out why Assange is NOT entitled to whistleblower protections! That you still have everything else assbackwards is why there is no point wasting any time on the fallacies above.
You are the one doing the ad hom and strawman arguments because you have no ability to refute the evidence presented. Now you go running to the playground crying "NO NO NO" to stick head deep in the sandbox of denial.
