Opinion Should WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange Be Jailed?

[Rational Poster]

Where any vital national security interests in Hillary's emails that were lost for someone else to find?

Apparently not.

"At sentencing, Saucier unsuccessfully argued for probation rather than imprisonment on the basis that Hillary Clinton was not indicted for her email controversy. Saucier's lawyers acknowledged that the two cases were different: Saucier admitted knowing that what he was doing was illegal."

So.. not only did he do something incredibly stupid, he knew it was incredibly stupid and admitted it.

Do you not understand how those two situations are different?

 

[SBJJ]

It is understood by the posters that the "rape" charge has been dropped and Been exposed as retaliation. God I hope so

It's funny watching both sides play musical chairs on this issue. Dude was a hero when he was exposing the Bush evils to half the partisans. Now he's a hero to the other half of the partisans

 

[gatchaman]

Apparently not.

"At sentencing, Saucier unsuccessfully argued for probation rather than imprisonment on the basis that Hillary Clinton was not indicted for her email controversy. Saucier's lawyers acknowledged that the two cases were different: Saucier admitted knowing that what he was doing was illegal."

So.. not only did he do something incredibly stupid, he knew it was incredibly stupid and admitted it.

Do you not understand how those two situations are different?

I'm trying to keep up with what is different?

At first you argued that Assange was worse because he disseminated information.

Then you argued that although Kristian Saucier did not disseminate information, he was careless with vital national security interests.

Was Hillary Clinton careless with vital national security interests?

An investigation was done; can you show me where the investigation concluded that Hillary Clinton's emails contained no vital national security interests?

 

[Rational Poster]

I'm trying to keep up with what is different?

At first you argued that Assange was worse because he disseminated information.

Then you argued that although Kristian Saucier did not disseminate information, he was careless with vital national security interests.

Was Hillary Clinton careless with vital national security interests?

An investigation was done; can you show me where the investigation concluded that Hillary Clinton's emails contained no vital national security interests?

In one situation the FBI investigated and found no evidence of wrong doing, let alone the willful dissemination of vital national security secrets.

In the other situation, a man took photos of the inner workings of a nuclear submarine which is quite literally one of the most vital national security secrets there are, which he knew was was wrong while doing it, and then lost the photos, and then admitted that he knew it was illegal during the proceedings.

Just bringing an personal electronic device on board a craft like that alone is enough to get you removed from that post. Still, he received just a hand slap as a sentence because everyone involved agreed he was just an idiot. He could have been jailed 5 times longer.

 

[cleetus]

Absolutely not. Exposing corruption is a hero's work, not a criminal's.

 

[Hog-train]

They were seeking a way to extradite Assange because he was hiding out in an embassy that we did not have an extradition treaty with so they COULD charge him formally.

I would assume they would pursue him under the Espionage Act like they did to Manning once in custody except he won't get his sentence shortened.

In the 2001 Bartnicki v. Vopper case, the Supreme Court ruled it would be unconstitutional to punish journalists for publishing information that SOMEONE ELSE gathered illegally.

Assange is not a US citizen.

Furthermore, the Espionage Act is very broad and not very clearly defined and hasn't really been used as a prosecution tool many times. It goes against a lot of 1st Amendment principles.

Secondly, a lot of journalists publish leak classified info ALL THE TIME.

That's how a lot of journalism works. Often individual people in government leak info for their own personal political advantage.

Secondly, the NY Times published the SAME SHIT Assange did. Why aren't they being prosecuted?

I was disappointed Assange didn't face up to the rape charges, but I don't think he should be imprisoned by the US Government for anything he's said or released.

He's not being charged with rape.

How many times must this be said? He's being sought for questioning (not charged yet) for having consensual sex, but without a condom.

 

[GSP_37]

He should have an accident involving radioactive beverage and a tall building's window.

 

[GSP_37]

Absolutely not. Exposing corruption is a hero's work, not a criminal's.

He is a willing tool for criminals.

 

[Trotsky]

List of people that I better not ever hear complain about corruption again, in any form, in any manner-

Quipling
Trotsky
Rational Poster
MC OverPressure
ShadowRun

*List subject to future updates

I voted "no," genius.

It is understood by the posters that the "rape" charge has been dropped and Been exposed as retaliation. God I hope so

It's funny watching both sides play musical chairs on this issue. Dude was a hero when he was exposing the Bush evils to half the partisans. Now he's a hero to the other half of the partisans

I count Assange as amoral, but consider him to have done more good than harm. He's certainly an egotistical douche, though. The worst thing he ever did, as far as I know, is when he included in one of his data dumps a huge amount of private personal, financial, and healthcare information that effectively named sexual assault victims and persons with communicable diseases. In that instance he actually pierced the privacy afforded to citizens by the government and rule of law.

 

[Trotsky]

Steps to being a corrupt government:
1) Be corrupt (but classify all details regarding that corruption)
2) Get exposed
3) Go after the people who exposed you for releasing classified data
4) Have a few shills on Sherdog defend your corruption because it was classified

However, one problem with this discussion is that a lot of you don't seem to understand what "corruption" means.

 

[Billthebutcher]

He's already in a self-imposed embassy prison.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Same thing as Snowden. If they charge him with state secrets act, he is right to flea, and hide.

That isn't a fair trial. Might as well just do away with due process. That is what the state secrets act is. It is a giant shit on the US Constitution, and those that support it should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

If he's innocent let him come face the charges

 

[VivaRevolution]

If he's innocent let him come face the charges

Same thing as Snowden. If they charge him with state secrets act, he is right to flea, and hide.

That isn't a fair trial. Might as well just do away with due process. That is what the state secrets act is. It is a giant shit on the US Constitution, and those that support it should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Tantamount to saying there's no way he's guilty.
"It's a drumhead trial!" -no, it isn't.
He did specific illegal things, there will be charges specific to those illegal things, and he can justify it how he chooses, but he's clearly guilty.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Tantamount to saying there's no way he's guilty.
"It's a drumhead trial!" -no, it isn't.
He did specific illegal things, there will be charges specific to those illegal things, and he can justify it how he chooses, but he's clearly guilty.

Then charge him without the state secrets act. They are even arguing they can't tell us he has been charged under state secrets act.

Like I said, just drone bombs him then. Stop pretending you care about due process. A charge and trial that is held in the dark, where many legal defesnes are banned from being made, is a sham trial.

Let's stop pretending then. We don't believe in due process. We just execute people and jail them without evidence. That is what the state secrets act is.

 

[VivaRevolution]

Tantamount to saying there's no way he's guilty.
"It's a drumhead trial!" -no, it isn't.
He did specific illegal things, there will be charges specific to those illegal things, and he can justify it how he chooses, but he's clearly guilty.

Did you know that Snowden has offered to return and face trial, if not charged with the state secrets act?

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Then charge him without the state secrets act. They are even arguing they can't tell us he has been charged under state secrets act.

Like I said, just drone bombs him then. Stop pretending you care about due process. A charge and trial that is held in the dark, where many legal defesnes are banned from being made, is a sham trial.

Let's stop pretending then. We don't believe in due process. We just execute people and jail them without evidence. That is what the state secrets act is.

What do you think he should be charged with instead?

 

[OverCoronavirus Pressure]

Did you know that Snowden has offered to return and face trial, if not charged with the state secrets act?

I know he wanted to dictate terms.
He's in no position to dictate terms.

 

[cleetus]

I'd say merely having classified information without disseminating it is an exponentially far less severe crime especially if it was not intentional and I accept the FBI's judgement on the matter.

He is a willing tool for criminals.

Criminality is in the eye of the beholder I guess. Hillary intentionally destroyed her servers filled with national security secrets after knowingly and recklessly being aware they could be "hacked" by the Chinese (which directly led to over a dozen of our spies being killed), Feinstein negligently allowing a Chinese agent access to national security secrets for the last 20 years, and Wasserman-Schultz knowingly allowing Pakistani agents access to the DNC servers with national security secrets are less severe crimes?

All of that went unpunished, yet some guy that revealed corruption and political lies has been essentially imprisoned for the last 6+ years is justice to you? If you're going to string up one of them, you damn well better hang all of them.