There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returns to Australia a free man after US legal battle ends

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returned to his homeland Australia aboard a charter jet on Wednesday, hours after pleading guilty to obtaining and publishing U.S. military secrets in a deal with Justice Department prosecutors that concludes a drawn-out legal saga.

The criminal case of international intrigue, which had played out for years, came to a surprise end in a most unusual setting with Assange, 52, entering his plea in a U.S. district court in Saipan, the capital of the Northern Mariana Islands. The American commonwealth in the Pacific is relatively close to Assange’s native Australia and accommodated his desire to avoid entering the continental United States.

Assange was accused of receiving and publishing hundreds of thousands of war logs and diplomatic cables that included details of U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. His activities drew an outpouring of support from press freedom advocates, who heralded his role in bringing to light military conduct that might otherwise have been concealed from view and warned of a chilling effect on journalists. Among the files published by WikiLeaks was a video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Baghdad that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.

Assange raised his right fist as he emerged for the plane and his supporters at the Canberra airport cheered from a distance. Dressed in the same suit and tie he wore during his earlier court appearance, he embraced his wife Stella Assange and father John Shipton who were waiting on the tarmac.

Schmerzbold ,

ok.

Now, I’d die a happy person if I never have to hear about him or from any of his countless sycophants ever again. Thanks.

Valmond ,

Hey, why don’t you shut up yourself?

JayObey711 ,

Little bro doesn’t care about human rights.

sukhmel ,

So, I guess some art is saved¹ in this event

1$45M [of] Masterpieces Risk for Assange’s Freedom: An artist threatens to destroy $45 million worth of masterpieces, including works by Picasso and Warhol, if WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange dies in prison, spotlighting the clash between art and activism.

maxinstuff ,
@maxinstuff@lemmy.world avatar

Will be interesting to see how this plays out - really feels like it’s been in a holding pattern for 5+ years.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

what do you mean? It just did play out. That’s the end.

maxinstuff ,
@maxinstuff@lemmy.world avatar

As in, will the USA be still after him? What role will he play in the public sphere now that he is free?

Etc.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

No and none.

He just walked out of a US district court. If they were going to grab him they would have.

He rolled the dice on being the world’s most well known “journalist” and he lost in the most spectacular way. He’s so incredibly lucky he got off as lightly as he did, having only lost 12 years of his life.

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

Do you think Assange is safe from assassination?

Do you think Assange has been tamed and will now live a quiet life going walkabout in the outback?

RememberTheApollo_ ,

Everything’s a conspiracy, even if it hasn’t happened yet.

fine_sandy_bottom ,

They would’ve assassinated him already.

Yes I think this has broken him. Quiet life in the burbs with the occasional phone interview on someone’s podcast.

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

They would’ve assassinated him already.

After Epstein? If he survives the first year without incident, then he’s safe.

etchinghillside ,

Unimportant, and probably unintelligent, question - does he have enough assets to go on with life or does he have to look for a job now? Does some easy position just get handed to him on name alone?

stoy ,

He has his name, that is his brand and he will probably use it to make bank as a public speaker

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

investing.com/…/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-…

feedum_sneedson ,

I WANT WHALE

Xtallll ,
@Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Russia has his back, the US has an election coming up and it won’t meddle itself.

afraid_of_zombies ,

He sits down at the computer and immediately Tweets out that he has information about Hunter Biden’s laptop and Hillary’s emails.

merc ,

On one hand, Assange is a shitty person. One woman woke up to him sticking his dick in her without her consent and without a condom. On the same trip he’d had sex with a different woman who had also insisted on his using a condom, which he reluctantly did… but then the condom mysteriously broke. While a guest of the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, where he was hiding out to duck the Swedish charges, he smeared shit on the walls and refused to bathe. He also helped the Russian GRU interfere in the 2016 Presidential Election, either as a useful idiot or a willing collaborator.

On the other hand, as shitty as he is, he was effectively a journalist. With Wikileaks he released leaked footage of a US helicopter firing on civilians in Iraq. He released reports on corruption by Kenyan leaders. He released internal scientology documents. The world needs journalists who will publish stories about things that powerful people, governments and churches don’t want people to know.

On the other, other hand, at times he hung his sources out to dry, like he did with Bradley / Chelsea Manning.

The plea deal he agreed to is bullshit. The charge of “conspiracy to commit computer intrusion” was basically encouraging a source to leak information to him. That’s journalism. “Conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defence information” was again, journalism. He was encouraging whistleblowers to report on wrongdoing by the government.

Even the plea deal is bullshit. He pled to violating the espionage act for… what? He didn’t break into anything himself. He wasn’t given a security clearance which he then violated. He wasn’t even American, in America, or working for the government. He was acting as a journalist receiving information from a whistleblower.

So, IMO, there’s nothing much to celebrate here. A shitty person pled to a bullshit charge, setting a bad precedent for journalism, and is now free. Lose, lose.

RustyWizard ,

That’s journalism.

Uh, no it fucking isn’t. Journalists absolutely are not permitted to entice people to commit crimes more than any other person. This is exactly why Greenwald and Poitras were not indicted, they didn’t ask Snowden to do anything, they just reported what he had already stolen.

DragonTypeWyvern ,

The state calls everything it doesn’t want you to do a crime, including telling the people things they absolutely need to hear.

RustyWizard ,

No shit, those are called laws. Journalists do not get a free pass to break laws. Imagine that was the case for a second. How quickly would the Sun or any other shit rag convince someone to murder someone so they can report on it?

This is an absurd stance. The dude broke the law, he has now had his day in court.

JigglySackles ,

How do you suggest a whistleblower actually get and release the information they need to prove themselves if not by breaking bad laws that protect corruption?

Not trying to drum up an argument but I think your black and white stance is flawed.

RustyWizard ,

That’s a straw man. We’re talking about journalists enticing someone to break the law. I already provided Greenwald and Poitras as examples of journalists who had a far larger impact with their coverage and did so without breaking the law.

JigglySackles ,

My bad directing towards whistleblowers when you meant journos. And only about them encouraging others to break the law. Even talking about journalists though I think the same logic can apply. If one lives in for example, an authoritarian regime, any word spoken against the state is considered unlawful. If we apply the situation to less authoritarian government, that still have laws against disseminating information about the government, we run up against the same issues. It’s against the law to show your government doing wrong. So what recourse is left but to break the law in hopes that you can effect some change?

How is a journalist or a whistleblower to call out the worst without breaking the laws or discussing the same? I get that they can sometimes, your two examples, though I’m not familiar with the instances, I’m sure are great examples of when it all goes right. But some information that should be made known, will see the government pursuing the full extent of the law and potentially beyond, against individuals involved in its dissemination. Journalist, whistleblower, exfiltrator, won’t matter.

I can understand protecting innocent people by censoring what comes out. I think that Assange is a scumbag and don’t like how he operates, but I also think governments need to be held accountable for their actions and choices.

RustyWizard ,

I’m really not sure what your argument is. Sometimes journalists and whistleblowers have to break the law? Sure. However, they are still breaking the law. Certainly, an adult who is breaking the law should know that they are subject to consequences and need to suck it up and live with those consequences. Rosa Parks had her day in court and was convicted of a crime. She accepted that she broke the law, regardless of how unjust it was, and did the time. That was enough to affect change.

If Assange, or anyone else, insists on breaking the law to be able to publish information, then they need to accept that they will be held accountable. Chelsea Manning served her time. Assange finally had his day in court. Snowden, hopefully, will get his day in court as well.

JigglySackles ,

I suppose my argument is that if a law is unjust, then so is the punishment for breaking it.

RustyWizard ,

Which is a fine stance in the large, but not applicable to the current story. Assisting someone in leaking classified information being illegal is not some moral injustice.

feedum_sneedson ,

You are a person with opinions.

merc ,

Everyone capable of thought should have opinions.

feedum_sneedson ,

I have conclusions.

Smoogs ,

And critical thinking. It’s not a matter of approval but this is the current updoot culture we live in right now and it’s very shit and puts topics besides the point.

Smoogs ,

And this rapist is held as a hero in Australia which just goes to prove how misogynist that culture is.

cammoblammo ,

How many hands do you have?

merc ,

However many the AI decides to give me.

ElderberryLow ,

Dude got off easy lol. He should spend the rest of his days counting his lucky stars or whatever god he believes in.

Senseless ,

I probably should know better than to argue with a random stranger on the Internet but I’ll bite… Why do you think he got off easy if he spend 7 years in the Ecuadorian embassy and 5 years in an UK prison, when his sentence is 5 years?

disguy_ovahea ,

According to the Espionage Act of 1917, he could be sentenced to life imprisonment or executed.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage

tastysnacks ,

The US justice system is rarely that strict. For example, Donlad Trump could get sentenced to decades in prison, but likely won’t spend anytime in jail.

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

Incarceration is the most extreme sentencing for nonviolent class E felonies without a prior record. The standard sentencing is a fine, community service, and/or probation.

The standard sentencing for espionage begins with incarceration. It’s just a question of how long, or if they’re deserving of execution.

tastysnacks ,

if they could make espionage stick. The New York times didn’t get prosecuted for publishing the Pentagon papers.

JigglySackles ,

I know that’s the norm but you’d think that even with it being the first time he was caught, the 30 count would warrant a more serious response. What would they do if he did this 30 times with a trial between each commitment of a felony? I think that should be a deciding factor even if it’s not likely to be.

disguy_ovahea ,

It’s thirty counts, but it’s still considered his first offense. They’re not considered consecutive. The only way he’ll see prison for that crime is if he proves to be at risk of committing more crime without “rehabilitative incarceration.” If Merchan reaches too far on his sentencing, it’ll just fuel the bias claim in Trump’s inevitable appeal.

JigglySackles ,

I probably have the jargon wrong as I’m no lawyer. But I would still think the count severity should matter more than it does.

disguy_ovahea ,

Me neither. I’m just repeating what attorneys and judges have publicly said on the matter. We’ll see when the time comes.

Jakeroxs ,

What is your point?

disguy_ovahea ,

The point of this thread. He indeed got off easy.

funkless_eck ,

12 years in prison is more than you get for killing a child while drunk driving

The man embarrassed the US by leaking their DMs.

neuracnu ,
@neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

DMs containing the identities of spies and assets.

He also managed to wriggle away from multiple rape charges in Sweden by waiting out the statute of limitations.

Heroes and villains alike have complex legacies.

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

It’s a bit more than embarrassment. Some of what he exposed was absolutely horrific. Other leaks directly compromised confidential war and spy intelligence that directly led to the execution of informants. There had to be consequences for the latter. Had he responsibly redacted names, as a journalist should, I may have had a different opinion.

funkless_eck , (edited )

it was a deliberate understatement for comic effect.

Still, though, 12 years is only considered proportionate because the the government sets the law and the government was embarrassed.

Its not a complete defence of Assange, his behaviors, his sketchy connections to Russia - but it is me saying that whistle-blowers are disproportionately punished not because it’s in the public interest

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

I disagree that embarrassment was the motivation.

Leaking the details of classified foreign intelligence operations is considered espionage or treason. Some of those leaks resulted in the execution of informants. Those are not small crimes.

According to the Espionage Act of 1917, he could have been executed. Imprisonment is standard, but 12 years is far better than the maximum of life in prison.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage

funkless_eck ,

Yes but you’re saying “it’s a big crime because the people who stand to benefit from it being a big crime say it’s a big crime.”

While I’m not saying all and any espionage/treason is good, I’m asking why one would think these memoranda are worth more than human life?

Were they? Would the world be better off with Assange dead?

andyburke ,
@andyburke@fedia.io avatar

For the operatives put in danger and/or killed, it was worth human life?

You seem to be ignoring that Assange either knowingly or unknowingly risked peoples' lives, people who had often given those lives into great risk in service of their country.

When the leaks first happened, I was supportive of Wikileaks (a natural position for an anti-war person like me). Later, when it was revealed that there had been no or little due diligence to ensure the information had been vetted and scrubbed, I realized how extreme it can be on both ends of the political spectrum.

Stop trying to paint this with some large political brush.

Assange is not a hero. The US government is not innocent.

funkless_eck ,

Risk, yes, but we know now that no one was hurt. It’s very different when you know what the consequences are.

Jakeroxs ,

Ah yes the poor innocent Cia agents

freeman ,

In service of their country? Did the US make them US citizens?

Because most US informants were working against their countries in some cases even after the US invaded.

ralphio ,

Some of those leaks resulted in the execution of informants.

This is speculation by the US, they were never able to prove this.

ikidd ,
@ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

The intelligence leaks were via media outlets that didn’t sanitize the publications. It was up to them to do what was needed on that front. And in the end, nobody has shown that those failures to censor information had anything like the consequences to intelligence assets that Libby/Cheney’s leaks had.

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

He created Wikileaks and personally hosted classified information. The release of the unredacted Afghan War Diary directly resulted in the execution of Afghani informants.

wikileaks.org

Ashyr ,

Source on the executions? I found that informants were named and when warned that this could result in their deaths Assange basically said, “lol, snitches get stitches.”

That said, I couldn’t find anything about the informants actually being executed.

disguy_ovahea ,

See “Informants named”

en.wikipedia.org/…/United_States_documents_leak_o…

june ,
@june@lemmy.dbzer0.com avatar

The Insurance section on that article is extremely interesting. I wonder if/when we will be able to crack into that potential treasure trove. But maybe it’s just 1.4GB of a picture of Julian’s asshole

Jtotheb ,

So, to clarify, since zero deaths are listed there—we don’t have a source for that claim?

ikidd ,
@ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

Exactly my point; there have been no deaths attributed to these leaks by any credible source other than an administration that has variously tried to frame, imprison, assassinate and astroturf Assange, that is directly implicated in warcrimes and has done it’s own leaks of intelligence assets that are actually provably murderous.

This is how this whole thing has gone since the start. We still have a group that’s inconsolably upset that Wikileaks exposed their nomination tampering, and will move the goalposts at every turn that shows Assange was on the right side of history.

ikidd ,
@ikidd@lemmy.world avatar

So, according to your own link, absolutely nothing but unproven allegations.

Neato ,
@Neato@ttrpg.network avatar

The man embarrassed the US by leaking their DMs.

When you do that to a nation about their classified intel, it’s called espionage. It’s a biiiit more serious than a social media hack.

In practical terms, espionage can affect thousands of lives directly and change the course of a war. Imagined the shitshow if someone released that kind of info now. It could jeopardize the Ukraine conflict. It’s treated as more serious than murder because it can be.

funkless_eck ,

Agreed in principle but it’s been nigh on 20 years and we’re yet to find someone that was killed as an upshot of the leak.

If you have information to the contrary I’d be keen to hear it.

Smoogs ,

And raping. You forgot the rape.

commie ,

he’s a journalist. he got one of the hardest deals any journalist has gotten.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

A real journalist would have redacted the names of Afghani informants so they wouldn’t run the risk of being killed by the Taliban

commie ,

that doesn’t make him not a real journalist. sloppy, unprofessional, maybe, but he’s still a real journalist.

disguy_ovahea ,

*who committed espionage.

commie ,

some might call it espionage. others might just call it journalism.

disguy_ovahea ,

He leaked unredacted confidential information that directly led to the assassination of Afghani informants.

That’s a little more than just “sloppy journalism.”

commie ,

that’s your opinion.

disguy_ovahea ,

He pled guilty. It’s his opinion too.

commie ,

do you see another way for him to go home? i don’t believe any guilty pleas, given how malicious prosecution is used as a cudgel.

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

That’s your prerogative, and your opinion. If he were responsible in his duties as a journalist, and redacted the names of informants and agents, I’d have a different opinion. I think his actions were reckless and irresponsible.

commie ,

he isn’t being prosecuted for failing to redact names

afraid_of_zombies ,

Should have thought of that before taking Putin’s side. Espionage is a messy business where the government that funds you will abandon you.

Xtallll ,
@Xtallll@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Chelsea Manning faced trial was convicted, and has been free since 2017, and she got to cuck Elon Musk, that is a true hero. She didn’t handle leaking the information in the best way, and was given bad advice by Assange, but she didn’t get kicked out of an embassy for running an election interference campaign.

commie ,

this reads like 5 non-sequiturs.

afraid_of_zombies ,

He helped a government get the candidate of their choice elected by manipulation of data dumps and spent a month before the election screaming how he had more dirt on one candidate.

commie ,

you are making leaps of logic and accusations of bad faith which are, themselves, bad faith. he is the authority on what materials he was given, and how their release fit his own publications standards and strategy.

afraid_of_zombies ,

Don’t gaslight me. I remember that Russian agent in October 2016 yelling about Hillary Clinton and stuff he said he had on her. Literally every single time I heard, read, or watched the news his fucking face was there going on and on about the embassy bombing or the emails.

Sorry your boy sucks Putin off but I am willing to bet when he does the condom doesn’t mysteriously break.

commie ,

it’s not gaslighting. you are making assumptions about motivations that directly contradict what he has said.

afraid_of_zombies ,

Did he or did he not repeatedly claim to have dirt on Hillary Clinton one month before the election?

No evasions, no reframing, answer the question please.

commie ,

I don’t recall in particular, but even if he did, you are making a leap to claim he was working for Russia or trump

afraid_of_zombies ,

What part of yes or no question did you not understand?

I don’t recall works for politicians trying to hide their boy toys, not here.

commie ,

I object to the supposition that Russia wanted trump to win. I believe Russia wanted Americans divided and trump was simply a means to that end.

afraid_of_zombies ,

Ok you reject it. Let me know how that goes for you.

commie ,

going great, thanks!

afraid_of_zombies ,

Really? In what way? Be exact

Psychodelic ,

I’m sorry if this is a bit too unrelated but would you say the same about Snowden?

I’m not as well informed on Assange but I tend to find the “espionage” criticism lacking, personally, since it seems to mainly favor the generally terrible foreign policy actions of the US empire and not so much the people of the US who are for the most part against those actions but have little recourse what with the 2 party system and having a plutocratic system of government

disguy_ovahea ,

Yes. I applaud them both for whistleblowing. They really fucked up by not redacting names. It’s reckless and dangerous. Assange should’ve known better, having been a professional journalist.

businessinsider.com/snowdens-cache-of-secrets-lik…

Psychodelic ,

Oh weird, that was not the impression I got from the many comments you made criticizing them for their brave actions.

I would tend to blame any negative fallout on the US government, personally. If they weren’t committing atrocities regular people wouldn’t have had to take the huge risk/be put at risk.

It’s like getting upset at a victim of police brutality for not working with the police

disguy_ovahea , (edited )

Their actions were brave until they became clouded by fame. Then both of them made it about leverage and made crucial mistakes that lead to threatened lives. I supported them in the past, prior to their dangerous missteps. I no longer comment in support of either of them.

A good example of responsible whistleblowing would be from the recent resignations from the Department of Defense. They gave very detailed accounts of information suppression while they were tasked with collecting information on civilian casualties in Gaza. None of the information they disclosed exposed confidential informants or put lives at risk.

It’s not just possible to be a responsible whistleblower, it’s imperative.

Psychodelic ,

You’re saying they should’ve just resigned? How would we have learned about PRISM without evidence?

I don’t know what you’re referring to about info suppression. Did we learn anything or just that we don’t know everything? How is that more helpful? Or, for who is it more helpful?

disguy_ovahea ,

No, I’m saying they shouldn’t have left the names unredacted in their leaks. That put people in danger.

Assange was a journalist. He wasn’t a government official.

Psychodelic ,

Do you think they could’ve done that and chose not to?

It seems like you’re saying they shouldn’t have done what they did because it wasn’t executed perfectly which feels awfully like what MLK was criticizing in his letter from a Birmingham jail, people that support things in theory but never in reality and that always seem to solely criticize the actions/methods of those fighting for justice

disguy_ovahea ,

Absolutely. Assange especially. He is fully aware of the redaction standards in journalism.

They both started out as legitimate whistleblowers, disclosing government corruption responsibly. Once they became famous/infamous, they both went down the slippery slope of power corruption and risked people’s lives for clicks. I have no respect for it.

Psychodelic ,

Could you expand on what Snowden did that you disagree with?

disguy_ovahea ,

I can’t. I was referring to articles that I’ve read in the past. By asking me that, I was prompted to look for a source, and it doesn’t seem like Snowden has directly compromised the safety of anyone. Most of the articles that I’m finding have general government insinuation of risk. That’s not enough for me to form an opinion, so I apologize, and retract my criticism of Snowden.

I still maintain that what Assange did was reckless, especially given his experience as a journalist.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

Sloppy would be missing some punctuation and grammar. The guy has blood on his hands just like the US government does. Also, he aided (some would say manipulated) Manning in her leak of the documents in a way that no journalist would or should do. Journalists report the story, Assange has repeatedly shown himself to be a self aggrandizer that is the story.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

TIL that self-aggrandizement is a federal offense.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

I never said it was. Aiding someone in exfiltrating classified documents on the other hand decidedly is. Not something journalists make a habit of doing, either.

commie ,

Aiding someone in exfiltrating classified documents on the other hand decidedly is.

but shouldn’t be if the goal is to expose wrongdoing in a journalistic publication.

commie ,

Not something journalists make a habit of doing, either.

because most are cowards

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

I’d say because most follow an ethics code, as much as I feel there was a public interest in those documents coming out, but with proper sanitation to protect lives.

commie ,

how was he supposed to protect anyone against the greatest surveillance state ever?

NOT_RICK , (edited )
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

I was talking about protecting the Afghani informants from the Taliban.

We knew about the spies and people who collaborate with U.S. forces. We will investigate through our own secret service whether the people mentioned are really spies working for the U.S. If they are U.S. spies, then we know how to punish them.

— Zabihullah Mujahid

I reviewed the statement of someone that a London paper claimed to be speaking for some part of the Taliban. Remember, the Taliban is actually not a homogenous group. And the statement, as far as such things go, was fairly reasonable, which is that they would not trust these documents; they would use their own intelligence organization’s investigations to understand whether those people were defectors or collaborators, and if so, after their investigations, then they would receive appropriate punishment. Now, of course, that is — you know, that image is disturbing, but that is what happens in war, that spies or traitors are investigated.

— Julian Assange

Assange is so casual about the potential human cost of his actions. The guy is a prick.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

Journalists do it all the time. That’s where they used unnamed sources and have gone to jail to protect those sources. Or maybe you’re too young to remember Deep Throat.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

I know who deep throat is. There’s a big difference between refusing to cooperate with an investigation and name names of confidential sources that have provided information versus actively aiding a person in absconding with information. The courts agree with me too, considering John Lawrence was released after a day by an appellate court. Also notable that his charge was merely contempt whereas Assange’s was espionage.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

Please explain how Assange ‘actively aided’ his source in getting the info.

I’ll wait.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

You can read about “Nathaniel” here and how the relationship between Manning and WL started. Manning herself implies the relationship was manipulative.

Over the next few months, I stayed in frequent contact with Nathaniel. We conversed on nearly a daily basis, and I felt we were developing a friendship. The conversations covered many topics, and I enjoyed the ability to talk about pretty much anything, and not just the publications that the WLO was working on.

In retrospect, I realize these dynamics were artificial, and were valued more by myself than Nathaniel. For me, these conversations represented an opportunity to escape from the immense pressures and anxiety that I experienced and built up throughout the deployment. It seemed that as I tried harder to “fit in” at work, the more I seemed to alienate my peers, and lose respect, trust and the support I needed.

In their chat logs Nathaniel assisted Manning in attempting to crack a password hash to attempt to cover up the source of the leaks. Thats where the journalistic line was crossed in my eyes.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

Thank you. I had not read this before.

NOT_RICK ,
@NOT_RICK@lemmy.world avatar

No problem, there’s so much noise out there regarding this topic; it’s really hard to get a handle on what is real and what is someone just blowing smoke.

girlfreddy OP ,
@girlfreddy@lemmy.ca avatar

As stated by ikidd above, it was up to the publishers to clean up the releases before printing/posting them.

ganksy , (edited )
@ganksy@lemmy.world avatar

Journalists do not pick sides. He had email from the RNC and DNC via Russian government sponsored hacks. He chose to release only DNC emails to the benefit of pro Putin candidate Trump. Edit word

Edit edit: can’t find any info on RNC hacks parallel to the DNC ones

ralphio ,

Could you explain why Russia would give him the RNC emails if they didn’t want them published? I’ve seen this claim go unchallenged many times.

ganksy , (edited )
@ganksy@lemmy.world avatar

I can’t explain their motives. I can only say WikiLeaks had them but did not release.

Edit: nope can’t say that. Apparently that was just an embolism. Nothing to see here just mopping up my pride.

ralphio ,

Typing this into duckduckgo shows me nothing about the them having the RNC emails:

did wikileaks have rnc emails

Not a single link. Please provide the link that says they had them. If you can’t read in between the lines, I’m saying what you said is untrue but gets repeated constantly.

ganksy ,
@ganksy@lemmy.world avatar

You’re right. I absolutely cannot find that wikileaks had RNC info. I’ve searched quite a bit determined to find what I remember but nada.

There is this but about DCLeaks having but releasing a bit of republican info on Trump’s primary challengers

On August 12, 2016, DCLeaks released roughly 300 emails from Republican targets, including the 2016 campaign staff of Arizona Senator John McCain, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, and 2012 presidential candidate and former Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann.[13] The release included 18 emails from the Illinois Republican Party.[18]

But that is not what I remember and certainly doesn’t help my case.

I apologize. Either my memory fails me or I was mislead (or both). Certainly does not refute Assange being a channel for Russia to get trump elected but does make me look like a tool.

ralphio ,

Appreciate the reply. And sorry for being a bit of a dick about it. It’s just one of my pet peeves since seeing it repeated for years.

ganksy ,
@ganksy@lemmy.world avatar

I think you were perfectly reserved in your response. It helped me not dig in or just blow it off and not respond. Thanks!

luckystarr ,

Journalists do and can pick sides. If you only ever report the opinion of the ruling party you’re a spokesperson and no journalist.

The “sides” may be political, moral or ideological. You’re still a journalist.

If this were not the case, Fox News world have been shuttered long ago.

ganksy ,
@ganksy@lemmy.world avatar

You don’t report for any party. You report the truth that you find by linking the facts you uncover.

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

Russia hacked the RNC, not Wikileaks

houstonchronicle.com/…/Russia-Hacked-Republican-C…

ganksy ,
@ganksy@lemmy.world avatar

Well shit. That is what I remember. All my searches: ‘russia hack RNC’, ‘republican hack’ , ‘RNC hack’, etc. were flooded with 2021 results from a different hack. Nothing from WikiLeaks, DCLeaks, Gucifer, 2016 presidential hack, or 2016 Russia interference yielded anything fruitful.

Thank you! At least I feel less crazy.

luckystarr ,

I ain’t no god.

afraid_of_zombies ,

You say that but with you have a belt that lets you look directly at the sun while standing on Mercury, Dave.

Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In ,

12 years of confinement is not easy.

RagnarokOnline ,

The detail I was interested in:

“The plea deal required Assange to admit guilt to a single felony count but also permitted him to return to Australia without any time in an American prison. The judge sentenced him to the five years he’d already spent behind bars in the U.K. fighting extradition to the U.S. on an Espionage Act indictment that could have carried a lengthy prison sentence in the event of a conviction. He was holed up for seven years before that in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.

The conclusion enables both sides to claim a degree of satisfaction.”

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •