Will Julian Assange agree to extradition now that Manning got clemency?

[KrazyK923]

Are Democrats not allowed to change their opinions of people in light of newer actions and behaviors?

Nope. Conservatives seem to have this weird thing (And its been there for a long time), where changing your opinion when the situation changes is seen as weak/losing/capitulating/being a hypocrite.

Exposing war crimes during the Iraq War? Great. Should be applauded.

Deliberately manipulating our election by releasing information against only a single candidate? Fuck off you Russian puppet. You've destroyed your and your group's entire reputation with this nonsense. Shit like this as well as trying to pretend you're some business selling t-shirts rather than an actual activist organization. Shit like your "press conference" where Hillary was supposedly being destroyed just being about begging for donations and selling t-shirts.

And yes---if he just posted shit about Trump, my opinion would be the same. Either expose both sides or neither. Because then you're just being a partisan masquerading as an activist.

[schwarzkopf]

Remission of sentence without immediate release doesn't seem to fit into the definition of clemency to me at all.

Even Obama's words were not of clemency, rather just remission of sentence due to an initially excessive one.

[Guyv3r]

Bunch of hipocrites. If Snowden shows his face in US soil he will never resurface again.

[caervek]

He didn't get clemency? Part of his sentence was commuted, he is still in jail until May and he is still considered to be a criminal.

That is clemency.

[Vorkreist]

"Can't we just drone this guy?" - Hillary Clinton ( also the heartfelt sentiments of all the triggered democrats )

I'm sure Assange is eager to come to the US.

[Cuppy]

Can anyone tell me what effects did the whole wikileak thing sprout?
Did it have any effect at all?

[NED funded]

He didn't get clemency? Part of his sentence was commuted, he is still in jail until May and he is still considered to be a criminal.

I could be wrong,but clemency doesn't necessarily involve pardon. The sentence being commuted does count as clemency.

[Zabatakis]

Can anyone tell me what effects did the whole wikileak thing sprout?
Did it have any effect at all?

Have to be a bit more specific here, they have done a number of things now, but in almost all cases the effects are largely debatable depending on which political spectrum or national affiliation you belong to.

[Cuppy]

Have to be a bit more specific here, they have done a number of things now, but in almost all cases the effects are largely debatable depending on which political spectrum or national affiliation you belong to.

Aight, well if we're talking about any concrete things. Did anything change?

[Zabatakis]

Aight, well if we're talking about any concrete things. Did anything change?

If we are talking about the election interference (releasing a bunch of hillary emails) I don't think so. She lost for a number of reasons and I don't think anyone out there was ok with voting her as president until the trifle amount of things wikileaks put out there changed their minds. As far as other stuff they have done (which is basically release classified information) maybe somewhat. They have certainly damaged some public figures and groups by outing shady goings on. As an organization they are really a joke, more about fund raising than doing "unbiased whistleblowing".

[Mormolyce]

Surprising no-one, Assange made a lame excuse and welched.

I wonder if he used Trump-brand backpedals.

Remember when Democrats celebrated Julian Assange as a hero? Pepridge Farm remembers!

Member when wikileaks released evidence of government abuses of power, instead of empty smears of political parties?

You know, like evidence showing the deaths of civilians in US air strikes, abuses of prisoners, a policy of ignoring murders and rapes committed by contractors and Iraqi allies, that kind of thing? As opposed to say, a bunch of emails from a political party's server that despite being very publicly scrutinised by the FBI, resulted in zero charges let alone any prosecutions? After promising they'd put a Presidential candidate in jail. But of course, they had their intended effect of dragging said candidate's name through the mud mere weeks before the election.

Ooooh, I member.

P.S. Guess who leaked THAT information, and paid an incredible price? While Assange puts himself into self-exile in the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid possible extradition to Sweden to face questioning over crimes committed in his personal life.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope. Conservatives seem to have this weird thing (And its been there for a long time), where changing your opinion when the situation changes is seen as weak/losing/capitulating/being a hypocrite.

Exposing war crimes during the Iraq War? Great. Should be applauded.

Deliberately manipulating our election by releasing information against only a single candidate? Fuck off you Russian puppet. You've destroyed your and your group's entire reputation with this nonsense. Shit like this as well as trying to pretend you're some business selling t-shirts rather than an actual activist organization. Shit like your "press conference" where Hillary was supposedly being destroyed just being about begging for donations and selling t-shirts.

And yes---if he just posted shit about Trump, my opinion would be the same. Either expose both sides or neither. Because then you're just being a partisan masquerading as an activist.

And hey while they're at it, maybe make those political smears about Trump contain some actual evidence of criminal abuse of power. Rather than, I dunno, nothing.

[Independent voter]

Which country is extraditing him?

[Osmeric]

Oh look. Assange turned out to be a lying liar who lied.

This is my surprised face.

[Theodarzna]

Member when wikileaks released evidence of government abuses of power, instead of empty smears of political parties?

If they were no big deal why are your panties in a wad, they revealed what needed to be revealed about the DNC and the Hillary Campaign.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope. Conservatives seem to have this weird thing (And its been there for a long time), where changing your opinion when the situation changes is seen as weak/losing/capitulating/being a hypocrite.

Exposing war crimes during the Iraq War? Great. Should be applauded.

Deliberately manipulating our election by releasing information against only a single candidate? Fuck off you Russian puppet. You've destroyed your and your group's entire reputation with this nonsense. Shit like this as well as trying to pretend you're some business selling t-shirts rather than an actual activist organization. Shit like your "press conference" where Hillary was supposedly being destroyed just being about begging for donations and selling t-shirts.

And yes---if he just posted shit about Trump, my opinion would be the same. Either expose both sides or neither. Because then you're just being a partisan masquerading as an activist.

I think in this situation is more "Liberals changing their opinion in the most self-serving of ways," that makes it a problem. They loved Assange when the dirt wasn't against their theoretical party, when it was, suddenly Assange is a traitor and threat to America. Assange revealed that Hillary and co were shady, which is something most suspected to be true long before Assange came about.

And that is the thing, I have no way of holding you to that "If it happened to Trump my opinion would stand." Because you and I both know at least for now It might never happened again like that, soy your theoretical non-partisanship will never be tested.

Its not that people are changing their mind, its that its the most self-serving act and is incredibly obvious that its self-serving.

[Mormolyce]

If they were no big deal why are your panties in a wad, they revealed what needed to be revealed about the DNC and the Hillary Campaign.

You mean that there's no evidence of criminal actions, so the FBI investigation concluded with no charges recommended?

That's what a smear is. Smoke without a fire, intended to tarnish someone's name at the right time. If you don't know the difference between whistleblowing and political smears, your brain has been lost to the partisan vortex.

[Theodarzna]

You mean that there's no evidence of criminal actions, so the FBI investigation concluded with no charges recommended?

That's what a smear is. Smoke without a fire, intended to tarnish someone's name at the right time. If you don't know the difference between whistleblowing and political smears, your brain has been lost to the partisan vortex.

There is evidence that Hillary was as shady and bad as everyone suspected her of being and that the DNC was against Bernie and had crowned Hillary long ago. There was evidence she was a bad person, a corrupt person, who was two faced. Also it wasn't as if Hillary enjoyed a good name before, the emails and speech transcripts merely confirmed what everyone not sipping the Koolaid already suspected.

[Kiri]

If they were no big deal why are your panties in a wad, they revealed what needed to be revealed about the DNC and the Hillary Campaign.

- - - Updated - - -



I think in this situation is more "Liberals changing their opinion in the most self-serving of ways," that makes it a problem. They loved Assange when the dirt wasn't against their theoretical party, when it was, suddenly Assange is a traitor and threat to America. Assange revealed that Hillary and co were shady, which is something most suspected to be true long before Assange came about.

And that is the thing, I have no way of holding you to that "If it happened to Trump my opinion would stand." Because you and I both know at least for now It might never happened again like that, soy your theoretical non-partisanship will never be tested.

Its not that people are changing their mind, its that its the most self-serving act and is incredibly obvious that its self-serving.

Isn't that way of looking at things self-serving as well? Instead of respecting the different context and contents of the leaks, you focus on partisanship, since that makes it easy to just dismiss things.

And before you call me a democrat or whatever, I am not even American. And I was always against what Wikileaks does, not necessarily for their agenda but for their utter lack of responsibility. They just find what others want to see hidden and publish it, without holding themselves accountable for what happens. Assange himself just personifies that, he sees himself a hero that exposes criminals or whatever, while hiding in some embassy from his own charges. The latest lie is just another example of it.

There is evidence that Hillary was as shady and bad as everyone suspected her of being and that the DNC was against Bernie and had crowned Hillary long ago. There was evidence she was a bad person, a corrupt person, who was two faced. Also it wasn't as if Hillary enjoyed a good name before, the emails and speech transcripts merely confirmed what everyone not sipping the Koolaid already suspected.

So proving that she is a 'bad person' which 'everyone already knew' is perfectly worth throwing out personal addresses and mails of people not involved with those shady businesses. I see.

[NED funded]

Remission of sentence without immediate release doesn't seem to fit into the definition of clemency to me at all.

Even Obama's words were not of clemency, rather just remission of sentence due to an initially excessive one.

Thats clemency.

[Theodarzna]

So proving that she is a 'bad person' which 'everyone already knew' is perfectly worth throwing out personal addresses and mails of people not involved with those shady businesses. I see.

Assange is a dick, but that is a personal statement.

Isn't that way of looking at things self-serving as well? Instead of respecting the different context and contents of the leaks, you focus on partisanship, since that makes it easy to just dismiss things.

And before you call me a democrat or whatever, I am not even American. And I was always against what Wikileaks does, not necessarily for their agenda but for their utter lack of responsibility. They just find what others want to see hidden and publish it, without holding themselves accountable for what happens. Assange himself just personifies that, he sees himself a hero that exposes criminals or whatever, while hiding in some embassy from his own charges. The latest lie is just another example of it.

Because the "different," context is purely a partisan context. The difference being primarily who gets the shit for the leak. Allegedly the other aspect is that someone with a cyrilic coded keyboard might have done the hacking. None of that changes the nature of the emails contents or what they reveal.

His charges appear largely fabricated by States that want him dead. I think his service in revealing what governments are doing is valuable enough.

[Kiri]

Because the "different," context is purely a partisan context. The difference being primarily who gets the shit for the leak. Allegedly the other aspect is that someone with a cyrilic coded keyboard might have done the hacking. None of that changes the nature of the emails contents or what they reveal.

His charges appear largely fabricated by States that want him dead. I think his service in revealing what governments are doing is valuable enough.

Why is it purely partisan context? If you strip it of names, you compare revealing crimes that a government tried to cover up to possibly assisting a foreign government in trying to undermine the democratic process by revealing shady, yet not illegal dealings. How is that not a different context?

On a tangent: Assange has stated that he also had the RNC mails. He could have just released them as well and there would be much fewer questions.