Assange Arrested

[GW Hayduke 1957]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

That's not what I asked.

Have you turned yourself in for every rule you've broken? Confessed every sin? Admitted every crime?

Appeal to extremes. Logical fallacies are a bad look. They are a sign of a weak position. Why does a Bernie bro feel the need to fallaciously defend Assange? It’s so weird

[bad_teammate 13481]

People are wondering why Assange hid from authority (and why Snowden does the same). It's not complicated. It's for all the same reasons all of us hide from taking responsibility.

All you have to do is look at why you hide from responsibility and you'll find the answer pretty easily.

 

[Brisketexan 106642]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

 

All you have to do is look at why you hide from responsibility and you'll find the answer pretty easily.

 

Assange's wife will nag him and say "I told you so?"

Edited April 12, 2019 by Brisketexan

[Nice Guy Eddie 13710]

21 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

That's not what I asked.

Have you turned yourself in for every rule you've broken? Confessed every sin? Admitted every crime?

I would turn myself in if the US govt had a warrant out for my arrest.  Would you?

[bad_teammate 13481]

12 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I would turn myself in if the US govt had a warrant out for my arrest.  Would you?

Depends on a whole lot of factors.

[triplehorn 2664]

 

[Thetexashammer 1062]

So, I stayed at a hotel within eyesight of the Ecuadorian embassy a while back. Cops out front of the embassy. The embassy was pretty small, maybe the size of the buildings along the south lawn in front of the tower. Had to be really confining.

That's all I got.

[bolverk 30245]

21 minutes ago, Thetexashammer said:

So, I stayed at a hotel within eyesight of the Ecuadorian embassy a while back. Cops out front of the embassy. The embassy was pretty small, maybe the size of the buildings along the south lawn in front of the tower. Had to be really confining.

That's all I got.

That's nice.

What are your thoughts on Trump's denial of not knowing anything about Wikileaks because that's not "his thing?"

[Thetexashammer 1062]

Just now, bolverk said:

That's nice.

What are your thoughts on Trump's denial of not knowing anything about Wikileaks because that's not "his thing?"

Bro, I'm living rent free in your brain. Take a xanax. I do appreciate that you value my opinion.

Edited April 13, 2019 by Thetexashammer

[F250 29178]

20 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

Surly schizophrenia. He's a Trump ally. Wait, he's a Trump enemy. See his friend said witch hunt. Only Trump has ever used that term. 

It's McCarthyism. People, particularly those that are into the "resistance" have lost their fucking mind.

 

[F250 29178]

9 hours ago, bad_teammate said:

That's not what I asked.

Have you turned yourself in for every rule you've broken? Confessed every sin? Admitted every crime?

This is actually a really good point. Assange is getting hit with the CFAA which is so fucking broad it's likely most of us have violated it. Shit, federal prosecutors were going after people for violating a EULA. If you have ever borrowed someone's Netflix credentials you may have violated the CFAA. At least that was the case up until about a year ago.

Check out what happened to Aaron Swartz when federal prosecutors threw the book at him.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

 

[suddenly shaggy 929]

19 hours ago, F250 said:

It's McCarthyism. People, particularly those that are into the "resistance" have lost their fucking mind.

 

Trump is president and has 89% approval by the GOP. I don't think it's the "resistance" that has lost their minds. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

It is possible to be a journalist and an international criminal at the same time.  Crazy to imagine I know but let’s not pretend he was hold up in the embassy for seven years because he was a freedom fighter.  The dude is a fugitive from justice in three separate countries, all western democracies no less.  That’s not easy to do. 

[Chooky 13337]

This week I learned that Ecuadorians don't like it when visitors smear feces on the walls.  

[F250 29178]

57 minutes ago, suddenly shaggy said:

Trump is president and has 89% approval by the GOP. I don't think it's the "resistance" that has lost their minds. 

That's not the way the world works.

Trumpkin insanity does not negate the resistance insanity.

 

 

[Brisketexan 106642]

This week I learned that Ecuadorians don't like it when visitors smear feces on the walls.  

Life-learning, man. That’s the good stuff.

[TDunk 590]

Maybe he should answer to the alleged rape/sexual assault charges from Sweden first.  That's when he went to the Ecuador embassy.  

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/jun/19/julian-assange-wikileaks-asylum-ecuador

[bad_teammate 13481]

Important Update!

 

[American Swindle 102]

Has anyone noted in the thread the 4.2 billion dollar loan the IMF authorized for Ecuador shortly after the arrest of Assange?  I read that Wikileaks released a document back 2008 that highlighted how the US govt. could put financial pressure on other countries via IMF to get give them incentive to follow through with certain foreign policy measures.  The loan just seems too coincidental for it not to be in response to the cooperation of the Ecuadorian embassy in the arrest of Assange. 

 

 

 

 

[bolverk 30245]

6 hours ago, American Swindle said:

Has anyone noted in the thread the 4.2 billion dollar loan the IMF authorized for Ecuador shortly after the arrest of Assange?  I read that Wikileaks released a document back 2008 that highlighted how the US govt. could put financial pressure on other countries via IMF to get give them incentive to follow through with certain foreign policy measures.  The loan just seems too coincidental for it not to be in response to the cooperation of the Ecuadorian embassy in the arrest of Assange. 

 

 

 

 

Maybe we could investigate these types of claims if you provided links to reliable sources of information. Specifically, where did you read that?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

The bigger mystery is why Ecuador was holding onto Assange for so long in the first place.

[GW Hayduke 1957]

13 hours ago, American Swindle said:

Has anyone noted in the thread the 4.2 billion dollar loan the IMF authorized for Ecuador shortly after the arrest of Assange?  I read that Wikileaks released a document back 2008 that highlighted how the US govt. could put financial pressure on other countries via IMF to get give them incentive to follow through with certain foreign policy measures.  The loan just seems too coincidental for it not to be in response to the cooperation of the Ecuadorian embassy in the arrest of Assange. 

 

 

 

 

If true, what is wrong with it? Countries pressure other counties all the time. Does this cross some moral boundary for you? 

[American Swindle 102]

3 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

If true, what is wrong with it? Countries pressure other counties all the time. Does this cross some moral boundary for you? 

When it comes to Free Speech and Freedom of the Press, then yes, I'd say it really does cross a boundary.  From what I gather from a journalist, who is interviewed in the podcast below, who has visited with Assange multiple times (the last time being a few weeks ago), the charges against Assange for "hacking" are unfounded and the narrative being pushed by mainstream outlets is simply untrue.  She claims that Assange only aided Manning to conceal her anonymity, which is the standard for all journalists.  

I'm sure there won't be a shortage of attacking the credibility of this source, but I for one trust Tom Woods' judgement when it comes to the credibility of of his guests (in this case, Cassandra Fairbanks.) 

https://tomwoods.com/ep-1385-the-truth-about-whistleblower-julian-assange/

 

His podcasts are only 30 minutes long so easy, quick listening. 

 

 

[American Swindle 102]

10 hours ago, bolverk said:

Maybe we could investigate these types of claims if you provided links to reliable sources of information. Specifically, where did you read that?

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2019/april/15/co-conspirator-ecuador-paid-off-to-deliver-assange/

 

Here you go.  

[WhatTheBuck 28904]

Never heard of Tom Woods. Ron Paul is a crazy person. 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

29 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

When it comes to Free Speech and Freedom of the Press, then yes, I'd say it really does cross a boundary.  From what I gather from a journalist, who is interviewed in the podcast below, who has visited with Assange multiple times (the last time being a few weeks ago), the charges against Assange for "hacking" are unfounded and the narrative being pushed by mainstream outlets is simply untrue.  She claims that Assange only aided Manning to conceal her anonymity, which is the standard for all journalists.  

I'm sure there won't be a shortage of attacking the credibility of this source, but I for one trust Tom Woods' judgement when it comes to the credibility of of his guests (in this case, Cassandra Fairbanks.) 

https://tomwoods.com/ep-1385-the-truth-about-whistleblower-julian-assange/

 

His podcasts are only 30 minutes long so easy, quick listening. 

 

 

Free speech, freedom of the press doesn’t protect journalists from breaking the law. But that is what a trial is for - to figure that all out.

My point, which I guess you agree, is that countries pressure other countries all the time and it isn’t something nefarious. We want our country to put pressure on other countries to bring criminals to justice, especially criminals acting at the behest of a hostile foreign country. 

Edited April 16, 2019 by GW Hayduke

[American Swindle 102]

1 hour ago, GW Hayduke said:

especially criminals acting at the behest of a hostile foreign country. 

Okay, can you elaborate as to what you exactly mean by this? Source(s)?

 

[F250 29178]

13 hours ago, bolverk said:

Maybe we could investigate these types of claims if you provided links to reliable sources of information. Specifically, where did you read that?

It's not exactly secret information. Moreno is attempting to liberalize the Ecuadorean economy and develop closer ties with the U.S. I don't think that anyone is surprised that the money comes with strings attached. This is how the world works. Ecuador is going to have to implement austerity programs, cutting Assange loose was probably the easiest move they had to make.

https://mobile.reuters.com/article/amp/idUSKCN1QA05Z

QUITO (Reuters) - Ecuador has reached a $4.2 billion staff-level financing deal with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), President Lenin Moreno said on Wednesday, as the Andean country grapples with a large fiscal deficit and heavy external debt.

The country will also receive $6 billion in loans from multilateral institutions including the World Bank, the Inter-American Development Bank, and the CAF Andean development bank, Moreno said in a message broadcast on national television and radio.

[TwiceHorn 31995]

6 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Okay, can you elaborate as to what you exactly mean by this? Source(s)?

 

There's a notion out there that Wikileaks aided the Rooskies in hacking the DNC/Clinton emails.  The #resistance is also mad that Wikileaks did Trump's ostensible bidding by publishing those emails.

As to the first sentence, there's no factual support.

I think Wikileaks is more like the ACLU: goring oxes at every turn, and making people on #bothsides mad all the time.  It may not be as benign as the ACLU, but I think it's similarly neutral.

Edited April 16, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[triplehorn 2664]

37 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

There's a notion out there that Wikileaks aided the Rooskies in hacking the DNC/Clinton emails.  The #resistance is also mad that Wikileaks did Trump's ostensible bidding by publishing those emails.

As to the first sentence, there's no factual support.

Do you make a distinction between "publishing those emails" as a matter of journalistic sequence vs. coordinating the timing of the release of those emails to within an hour as a calculation to maximize political impact for Trump ?  

Because that is exactly what happened within an hour of the Trump Access Hollywood "grab 'em by the pussy" video surfacing.  Did Trump strategist Roger Stone have someone at the Russian Intelligence Service on speed dial for Wikileaks to carry out the response ?

Have a trial, get the evidence out there to understand who was coordinating what with whom and why.  Then let a jury decide.

 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

24 minutes ago, American Swindle said:

Okay, can you elaborate as to what you exactly mean by this? Source(s)?

 

I’m glad we are on the same page that pressuring other countries to do things isn’t nefarious.

Assange is indicted for conspiring with Manning to hack a government database. Read the unsealed indictment from March 2018. 

Sweden had issued an arrest warrant in 2010 for sexual assault and rape. 

He breached bail in 2012 and London police issued an arrest warrant. 

Wikileaks is named as Organization 1 in the Mueller hacking indictment. Wikileaks coordinated with guccifer 2.0 - gru - and released stolen emails in a way to “have a much higher impact.” 

Mueller disclosed in court filings in Feb that Stone and Wikileaks coordinated on the timing of release of stolen email. 

It isn’t a coincidence that Wikileaks (who had been coordinating with the gru and Stone) dumped emails days prior to the dnc convention and hours after the access Hollywood tape release.

If you don’t believe me, take Pompeo’s word. He called Wikileaks a non-state hostile intelligence service abetted by state actors like Russia. He stated the gru used Wikileaks to release data. Pompeo is trump’s guy.

[Captainant 28412]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

I think Wikileaks is more like the ACLU: goring oxes at every turn, and making people on #bothsides mad all the time.  It may not be as benign as the ACLU, but I think it's similarly neutral.

Yeah, Trump's CIA director disagrees with you.

Quote

“WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service. It has encouraged its followers to find jobs at CIA in order to obtain intelligence... And it overwhelmingly focuses on the United States, while seeking support from anti-democratic countries and organisations,” said Pompeo.

“It is time to call out WikiLeaks for what it really is – a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.”

 

[sidis 9990]

21 hours ago, American Swindle said:

Has anyone noted in the thread the 4.2 billion dollar loan the IMF authorized for Ecuador shortly after the arrest of Assange?  I read that Wikileaks released a document back 2008 that highlighted how the US govt. could put financial pressure on other countries via IMF to get give them incentive to follow through with certain foreign policy measures.  The loan just seems too coincidental for it not to be in response to the cooperation of the Ecuadorian embassy in the arrest of Assange. 

 

for whatever it's worth, the extension of the existing credit facility occurred on march 11th, not "shortly after the arrest of assange."

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2019/03/11/ecuador-pr1972-imf-executive-board-approves-eff-for-ecuador

[GW Hayduke 1957]

15 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Yeah, Trump's CIA director disagrees with you.

 

Meh... aclu and hostile intelligence service... same thing! #teamtrump

[sidis 9990]

1 hour ago, TwiceHorn said:

There's a notion out there that Wikileaks aided the Rooskies in hacking the DNC/Clinton emails.  The #resistance is also mad that Wikileaks did Trump's ostensible bidding by publishing those emails.

As to the first sentence, there's no factual support.

I think Wikileaks is more like the ACLU: goring oxes at every turn, and making people on #bothsides mad all the time.  It may not be as benign as the ACLU, but I think it's similarly neutral.

i think assange is a particularly complex character and the implications of this arrest are insanely complicated regarding freedom of press, transparency in government, access to information, whistleblower laws, and a host of other issues.  there is not clear demarcation line of right and wrong in this instance.

that said, at this point, i cannot agree with the characterization that asanage and wikileaks are truly neutral.  a willingness to cozy up to and operate in coordination with political "operatives" like roger stone is telling.  moreover, i simply cannot understand the incredibly conspicuous lack of anything russia-related when it comes to their output (they did not release the panama papers).  one-sided transparency isn't in and of itself a bad thing and our willingness to evaluate our own secrets and information is extremely important, but this pattern of targets simply undermines the neutrality of its motivations in my opinion (particularly when we are talking about a country with the misgivings of russia).

[UncleCharlie 334]

Assange = Hacking to influence political outcomes

Snowden = Hacking to inform American people about nefarious shit the government was doing to it's own citizens

[American Swindle 102]

1 hour ago, sidis said:

for whatever it's worth, the extension of the existing credit facility occurred on march 11th, not "shortly after the arrest of assange."

https://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2019/03/11/ecuador-pr1972-imf-executive-board-approves-eff-for-ecuador

My bad, does it matter? 

[TwiceHorn 31995]

2 hours ago, triplehorn said:

Do you make a distinction between "publishing those emails" as a matter of journalistic sequence vs. coordinating the timing of the release of those emails to within an hour as a calculation to maximize political impact for Trump ?  

Because that is exactly what happened within an hour of the Trump Access Hollywood "grab 'em by the pussy" video surfacing.  Did Trump strategist Roger Stone have someone at the Russian Intelligence Service on speed dial for Wikileaks to carry out the response ?

Have a trial, get the evidence out there to understand who was coordinating what with whom and why.  Then let a jury decide.

 

I don't believe there's anything criminal about that.  Maybe an election law violation.  I'm just tired beyond all measure of conspiracy theories.  Trump's an asshole.  We apparently need harder evidence of that to do anything about it other than "unelect" him.  Spinning more conspiracy theories doesn't help.

Edited April 16, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[triplehorn 2664]

6 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't believe there's anything criminal about that.  Maybe an election law violation.  I'm just tired beyond all measure of conspiracy theories.  Trump's an asshole.  We apparently need harder evidence of that to do anything about it other than "unelect" him.  Spinning more conspiracy theories doesn't help.

So tired.  Even if it's not criminal, there is plenty of reason to hide it and deny it.  And it's very much in the public interest to get the truth.

I know you're competent and experienced enough to know that there are a lot of motivations for people to lie to federal investigators and to obstruct an investigation even when a specific bar for a specific crime may not be present.  A few examples:  it's politically devastating.  It's embarrassing and exposes massive deception and serial lying to the public by others.  The truth could result in costing certain people a whole lot of power and money.  

Hence Stone's 5 counts of false statements and criminal charge for witness tampering.  for starters. 

[GW Hayduke 1957]

19 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

I don't believe there's anything criminal about that.  Maybe an election law violation.  I'm just tired beyond all measure of conspiracy theories.  Trump's an asshole.  We apparently need harder evidence of that to do anything about it other than "unelect" him.  Spinning more conspiracy theories doesn't help.

It’s not a conspiracy theory that trump's Secretary of State labeled Wikileaks as a hostile intelligence service. Or that mueller described Organization 1 in the gru/guccifer indictment. Or that mueller described Wikileaks as coordinating the timing with Stone. Those are all facts  

[TwiceHorn 31995]

The question I am wrangling with is whether what Assange and wikileaks does is or should be protected by the first amendment or other journalistic freedom concepts, as urged by some opponents of extradition. 

He has been indicted for conspiring with Manning to accomplish the espionage for which Manning was convicted. If the indictment proves true, that is conduct that legally and from a common sense perspective doesn't implicate valid journalistic freedom. You can publish. You can publish stolen info. But you can't steal info and publish it and hide behind journalistic freedom. 

There is a notion, not the subject of indictment, that he similarly conspired with rooskies to hack (as opposed to publish) the DNC emails. Pending further facts, what he did was not criminal and within journalistic freedom, whether it's unseemly or not. 

Edited April 16, 2019 by TwiceHorn

[GW Hayduke 1957]

2 minutes ago, TwiceHorn said:

There is a notion, not the subject of indictment, that he similarly conspired with rooskies to hack the DNC emails

I haven't seen anyone saying this. I'm not on twitter though

[sidis 9990]

1 hour ago, American Swindle said:

My bad, does it matter? 

it likely doesn't to you...nor does the existence and long-standing terms of the extended fund facility for ecuador from imf.

[suddenly shaggy 929]

46 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

I haven't seen anyone saying this. I'm not on twitter though

Never heard it either and I cannot find anything when I searched for it. It also doesn't make any sense. The GRU doesn't need help hacking anything. They do it all the time. Assange published the emails, the Russians hacked them.

[sidis 9990]

so about that whole wikileaks being neutral thing...read the last two paragraphs of page 44 of the special counsel's report.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Ughhhhhh he’s such a sack of crap.

[TwiceHorn 31995]

On 4/16/2019 at 4:46 PM, GW Hayduke said:

I haven't seen anyone saying this. I'm not on twitter though

It popped up a few times in the Mueller thread when Wikileaks' publication involvement became clear.  First it was "he published it, he oughta be indicted."  Then, "well only if he was complicit in the hack, which I'm sure he was."

There's also a kind of large redaction on ongoing investigation grounds in the Report section on Russian hacking that might well relate to an investigation of same.

[American Swindle 102]

Sarah Palin gets it.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Palin gets nothing but strange dick and redneck offspring.

[Brisketexan 106642]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

Palin gets nothing but strange dick and redneck offspring.