US prepares charges to seek Julian Assange's Arrest

a reply to: JakeR777

Funny that, they never ever expressed their intention to prosecute him until he has disappeared from public view. Betcha we never see a close up of Assange talking throughout the entire show trial or ever again.

Wikileaks has been 'turned' anyway.

Nobody has seen him in the flesh since big boobs bay watch babe took him a meal immediately after which he was taken ill and taken away from the Ecuadorean embassy. Never seen by close supporters who knew him personally since.

a reply to: JakeR777

I have heard this kind of bluster before.

One does have to look at the source, and here we have an unnamed source close to the matter? That is not verifiable information, or rather, verification is outside our reach at the moment.

But as a piece of propaganda goes, its not half bad, and not in the way people will assume either. While this news will no doubt aggravate those of us who believe that Assange and Wikileaks are necessary in order that governments never be as powerful as they would like to be, since they cannot secure their data against acts of patriotism (sharing evidence of criminal behaviour with an outfit like Wikileaks is simply the most patriotic thing ANY intelligence agent, or part of the infrastructure could actually be doing with their time, after all), it will also make the Trump administration look like it is "getting things done".

When you look at how much of an abject failure Trumps presidency has been during the first hundred days, and how poorly the public look upon him at the moment, what with his approval ratings being lower than that of any President since Eisenhower's day, when records began, you can clearly see that his administration needs a boost in the public eye. With approval even dropping amongst republicans, dropping eight percentage points no less, and given his absolute obsession with ratings and approval, it is not beyond belief that something might have been suggested to a CNN reporter, which, while not accurate, sounds like the sort of "progress" that his base like.

That is the sort of manipulative nonsense that any scheming pack of mongrel bastards in power, but dropping supporters like spare change from drunk fingers, would do.

a reply to: JakeR777

Chew on this:

But Ben Wizner, director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, argued that US prosecution of Assange sets a dangerous precedent.

"Never in the history of this country has a publisher been prosecuted for presenting truthful information to the public," Wizner told CNN. "Any prosecution of WikiLeaks for publishing government secrets would set a dangerous precedent that the Trump administration would surely use to target other news organizations."

Your own source.

The ACLU is one of the NGOs supported by George Soros. Why would groups target an individual who stands up for Julian Assange and the right of WikiLeaks to publish material embarrassing to governments?

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JakeR777

I have heard this kind of bluster before.

One does have to look at the source, and here we have an unnamed source close to the matter? That is not verifiable information, or rather, verification is outside our reach at the moment.

The CNN article is a bit on the poor side but CIA Chief Mike Pompeo announced it on April 13th adress

No, Julian Assange and his kind are not the slightest bit interested in improving civil liberties or enhancing personal freedom. They have pretended that America's First Amendment freedoms shield them from justice. They may have believed that, but they are wrong. …

We can no longer allow Assange and his colleagues the latitude to use free speech values against us. To give them the space to crush us with misappropriated secrets is a perversion of what our great Constitution stands for. It ends now.

The charges are 'conspiracy, theft of government property, or violating the Espionage Act' - which have huge grey areas in misapplication of the law. While I can't comment on the paticular source (no idea who it is but the info reased has been backed up by following gov announcements and comments - plus when taking on international intel services and mutli-billion/trillion launderings the confidentiallity is a neccesary measure to avoid source imprisonment or potential assasination (not saying US want that, there's plenty worse intel from other countries who have no issues

The Indy (vehemntly anti-russia to be clear due to the propriety/ed being under death threat from Putin and exilled from Russia is pushing the stories with more info but the odd bit of churnalsim.

Though seeing as how fluffy the charges are/without precedent IIRC and seem to not stand a cat in hells chance of passing (short of major scandal) but this is the FBS,cia/FBI/DoJ in on trying to press charges via revising the law - fingers crossed they'll see sense and stop or continue and fail -personally I don't see him being charged with anything that'd lead to a prosecution but yo never know when national securtity/securty services/war crimes/rigged elections papersm intrnational multi-trillion tax evasion sadly looke the other way.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JakeR777

I have heard this kind of bluster before.

One does have to look at the source, and here we have an unnamed source close to the matter? That is not verifiable information, or rather, verification is outside our reach at the moment.

The CNN article is a bit on the poor side but CIA Chief Mike Pompeo announced it on April 13th adress

No, Julian Assange and his kind are not the slightest bit interested in improving civil liberties or enhancing personal freedom. They have pretended that America's First Amendment freedoms shield them from justice. They may have believed that, but they are wrong. …

We can no longer allow Assange and his colleagues the latitude to use free speech values against us. To give them the space to crush us with misappropriated secrets is a perversion of what our great Constitution stands for. It ends now.

The charges are 'conspiracy, theft of government property, or violating the Espionage Act' - which have huge grey areas in misapplication of the law. While I can't comment on the paticular source (no idea who it is but the info reased has been backed up by following gov announcements and comments - plus when taking on international intel services and mutli-billion/trillion launderings the confidentiallity is a neccesary measure to avoid source imprisonment or potential assasination (not saying US want that, there's plenty worse intel from other countries who have no issues

The Indy (vehemntly anti-russia to be clear due to the propriety/ed being under death threat from Putin and exilled from Russia is pushing the stories with more info but the odd bit of churnalsim.

Though seeing as how fluffy the charges are/without precedent IIRC and seem to not stand a cat in hells chance of passing (short of major scandal) but this is the FBS,cia/FBI/DoJ in on trying to press charges via revising the law - fingers crossed they'll see sense and stop or continue and fail -personally I don't see him being charged with anything that'd lead to a prosecution but yo never know when national securtity/securty services/war crimes/rigged elections papersm intrnational multi-trillion tax evasion sadly looke the other way.

a reply to: DJW001

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. The article provided the admins opinion on the subject than provided a quote from someone against charging him......Sooooo what are you trying to prove?

Charging and trying a journalist for presenting truthful information WOULD be a dangerous precedent set. Do you think that alone is going to convince the current admin. to change their minds/leave him alone? Hell no.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Trump very well may be trying to tack up his "accomplishments" but this could easily back fire, he already looked like a big hypocrite just talking bad about assange after all the love WikiLeaks , go WikiLeaks, etc comments. I used to think he would maybe, JUST MAYBE be a different type of politician. Someone that cant be bought out or controlled, truly wanting to try to do good for our country...

Now I see its all just a business ploy, power move/attempt to build a legacy to remember...those types of selfish reasons 90% of politicians are in it for.

a reply to: bastion

CIA chiefs have also stated that there was no mass surveillance, which we now know to be false. We also know that the programs which permit the current variation of it to exist, have actually been running since around the time of Nixon, if not before, so I put not too much stock in that, to be honest.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: bastion

CIA chiefs have also stated that there was no mass surveillance, which we now know to be false. We also know that the programs which permit the current variation of it to exist, have actually been running since around the time of Nixon, if not before, so I put not too much stock in that, to be honest.

On the surface yes but the charges have been a work in progress for three months and over 12 over all - while there are many barriers and may not happen (and yes psyops could be an option in solated circumstances)- CIA love bluster - the vast array of other outlets covering it provides substence plus leaked info in the press (Indypendent in the UK) which can'tbe published due to draconian laws.

I think they'll harge him and fail miserably personally.

a reply to: JakeR777

I don't understand what point you are trying to make. The article provided the admins opinion on the subject than provided a quote from someone against charging him......Sooooo what are you trying to prove?

Charging and trying a journalist for presenting truthful information WOULD be a dangerous precedent set. Do you think that alone is going to convince the current admin. to change their minds/leave him alone? Hell no.

I agree. Thank goodness for George Soros and the ACLU he sponsors.

a reply to: DJW001

Lol I'm not a fan of soros, Rockefeller, the Mercer's, or any mega elite greedy ppl that manipulate and coerce our laws to their benefit..

a reply to: SR1TX

WikiLeaks is the reason why Donald J. Trump become the U.S. President, with the Podesta email leaks, and even Trump encouraged more leaks at that time.

Why would Trump go after Wikileaks?