Assange should have seen that coming.
Republican politicians expressed fury at the time, accusing Assange of treason, and Trump himself told an interviewer: “I think it’s disgraceful, I think there should be like death penalty or something.”
7 Likes
11 Likes
One has to weigh whether being instrumentalized by third parties is worth the resulting newsworthiness or other good ends that could be achieved. The publication of the Unabomber’s manifesto, for example, resulted in his capture. The DNC leaks were highly newsworthy, in my opinion, and should have been published regardless to the consequences to my candidate (and my country;). On the other hand, who knows if the Clinton leaks strengthened Assange’s hand: the next time he warns an administration about consequences, perhaps they’ll listen and give him the pass they should have given him from the start. So, yes, Wikileaks’s credibility took a hit, but Assange himself is in a more powerful position – something we could wish on more persecuted journalists.
(Assange in the near future, perhaps: “Hmm, now where did I put those internal Conservative party emails about Brexit?”)
I thought of using Ray Donovan instead.
Agreed – he doesn’t understand the bully Trump – if someone is weak, you don’t help them, you kick them while they’re down.
16 Likes
This metaphor is nausea-inducing when used to support someone who waited out a rape accusation.
7 Likes
I used to think WikiLeaks was about publishing credible whistleblower material no matter what. I’m not sure WikiLeaks’ mission includes blackmailing the people whose secrets they’re about to publish to “give them a pass” or else “consequences”.
(I also remember hearing that WikiLeaks is sitting on lots of juicy stuff about Putin that they don’t publish but that may be neither here nor there.)
11 Likes
Belarus and Wikileaks was a wild story.
As a hero in a thriller, I think we would all root for him to use Wikileaks that way to save himself. Seeing from his perspective as a human with a family, he may have to act like a calculating political player to ever get out of that embassy a free man.
Does no one remember this from 2011? 
10 Likes
I understand why Assange did what he did in 2016
Assange’s behavior here is the classic example of cutting off your face to spite your nose.
You don’t get a free pass for a lifetime of asshattery because of a couple of good acts, and it is ironic that some of the people objecting to criticism of Assange are so happy to overlook the good HRC and Obama have done over their careers, which I would say is far greater than any good Assange has done over his.
Bringing up Glenn Greenwald in a defense of Assange is pretty rich given the despicable behavior of Greenwald’s organization to genuine hero Reality Winner.
16 Likes
Assange is a persecuted journalist. You shouldn’t get confined in asylum or tortured by the US in a black site for a lifetime of asshattery or being a douche. He released a story that hurt Clinton’s chances for election. That doesn’t mean he should get disappeared by the US. I know the rights of dissident journalists aren’t real important for most people any more, compared to the joys of politically motivated retribution.
I agree – HRC and BHO have done much over their careers that was laudable. Their pursuit of Assange and other leakers is despicable. Assange struck back. We would praise this in a fictional hero. In a complicated human whose had his character assassinated in the press, not so much. His publication of the DNC emails strengthens his credibility so that he may some day be able to bargain for his own release. So I understand why he did it, but I wish it hadn’t had to happen. Clinton and Obama weaponized Assange by persecuting him. Clinton got hit with that weapon. When you oppress people and fight dirty, occasionally they fight back and land a punch.
1 Like
I imagine he’ll be kicked out, seized by MI6, then deported to the US at which point he will be put on trial or pardoned. Trump apparently “loves Wikileaks”, so who knows?
1 Like
Curious if the current mood at boingboing is against Chelsea Manning as well?
Wasnt that long ago that speaking truth to power was celebrated, regardless of how well you cleaned up after your cat. But then it became clear that for many, the ‘truth to power’ applause has conditions. When embarrassing Bush, clap hard (and rightly so). But embarrass Obama or Hillary? Bronx cheers instead.
It may be old school thinking, but truth to power is truth to power, no matter if its a D or an R thats offended, no matter how annoying the speaker, and even if theres a messy cat somewhere in the loop.
3 Likes
What should either of them have done? He published top secret information that may have been necessary to run the country, but taken out of context, and embarrassing. No one wants to show you how the sausage is made, even when you know it is delicious.
No, BO and HC did what was necessary…they demonized the guy stealing their information. And their attorney general told them that Assange wasn’t committing a crime, so all they had was rhetoric. This is what no one gets that defends this nut job…he has not committed a crime in America. He may never be allowed to come into the states again, but he hasn’t committed a crime, therefore has no worry about being brought here in a hood and kangaroo court.
I mean, if we still had a president that cared about the letter and spirit of the law.
3 Likes
WL and Assange were played like a violin by Putin and Russian intelligence. They didn’t just hack the DNC, they also hacked the RNC. Guess which side they leaked and which side they kept for blackmail? WL lost a lot of credibility with most reasonable people at that point, and it doesn’t much matter if they were willing dupes or merely incompetent journalist-ish techbros. The fact that Assange doubles-down on it rather than admitting it was a massive mistake just makes the whole thing worse. For him.
12 Likes
On what charge specifcally? The sexpesting was Swedish, and he’s an Australian citizen who conducted his work abroad so things like “treason” and “espionage” would probably not be workable.
1 Like
tips@nytimes.com (or substitute your paper of choice)
https://pastebin.com
https://www.reddit.com/submit?selftext=true
Congratulations, you’re now ready to perform 100% of the information dissemination functions that Wikileaks is willing to admit they perform.
Now, if you want to turn over government secrets to people who won’t necessarily release them, except in service to their own agenda (whatever that may be and whoever may be creating it–you won’t know), then yes, you will need to contact Wikileaks for that extra tier of service.
9 Likes
Just to be clear, what I meant was you don’t get a free pass from criticism for your behavior; I was reacting to the calls above that BB posters should leave him alone because he did something good once so is a hero forever.
However, let’s examine the idea that he’s in serious danger of being black-opped out of existence. I think that’s bunk, a victim-fantasy of his that his acolytes have naively bought into. The reality is that Sweden is a nation of laws, Britain is a nation of laws, and even the horrid old US is a nation of laws, and neither of the former would extradite him to the latter if they didn’t get assurance that he would not be dropped in a hole.
As far as I am aware, nobody as well known as he is has been treated by US authorities the way he and his fans keep claiming they fear he will been treated(*). Even Chelsea Manning, who was treated miserably and inexcusably, only spent a few years in non-secret prisons before being let out to party with her Nazi buddies.
All these theories, that he is facing torture, disappearance, and death - this is the fevered imagination of dime-store novels and new world order websites.
(*) For sure nobody white, straight, with powerful friends.
4 Likes
