• Autonomous User@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Great seeing far more sensible comments here compared with c/technology

    Always suprising to see more on a whistle blower than the guys that actually did the war crime.

  • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    4 days ago

    Good for him - he’s less innocent than folks like Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden but a heavy prosecution of him would definitely have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers. Did he release things at politically convenient times? Yes. Should that be illegal? Fuck no.

  • IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Meanwhile, they have an orange beanbag presidential hopeful spilling the beans to the whoever around the world and he gets millions of dollars of support, literal legal immunity from anything and 1/3 of the country want him to become their Cheeto leader in Mountain Dew.

    • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      That’s because that orange beanbag seated three associate justices of the Supreme Court, 54 judges for the courts of appeals, 174 district court judges, and three judges for the United States Court of International Trade.

      Even worse, citizens want to let him do it again.

      • errer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 days ago

        To be fair, Biden has seated almost as many judges in his term, so that has balanced out at the lower levels. With the very important exception of the Supreme Court.

        • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 days ago

          There’s also the important point of Biden not committing crimes, like those that the commenter mentioned, and having those charges heard by one of his own appointed judges. Appeals from Trump’s other cases can potentially end up with one of his appointed appeals court judges, or ultimately be heard by the newly conservative Supreme Court, as you pointed out.

          I mentioned it because that’s the notable difference between Assange’s and Trump’s ability to live above the law.

  • TheBigBrother@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    If Assange wasn’t in US territory when revealed classified information, why is he being judged by the US?

    Was not the US should be judging the one/s who filtered the information and not who publish it?

    • sunzu@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      u/@zabadoh@ani.social explained how

      the reason is that the US can exercise such authority in practice with any consequences.

      a bigger concern here is his native government’s limp dick response tbh

      aint he from AU?

      • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        the US can exercise such authority

        Many countries have the authority to prosecute crimes that occur on their soil even if the perpetrator is outside the country. Including Assange’s native country.

        The foreign interference crimes apply to conduct that occurs in Australia. So, if the perpetrator was in Australia at the time they engaged in interference, then prosecuting them would be relatively straightforward, provided there was sufficient evidence. If an offender is outside Australia at the time of the interference, they could still be charged with a crime.

        • sunzu@kbin.run
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          I don’t understand the point you are trying to make?

          AU is not prosecuting here

          • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            The point is that the US is not unusual in prosecuting people in other countries. Australia and others do the same thing.

            • sunzu@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Who did AU prosecute like this?

              Point I was making is that AU is failing to protect its citizen who is being harassed… BTW ;)

    • FlowVoid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 days ago

      Anyone involved in a crime committed on US soil can be charged with the crime.

      Do you suppose hacking your computer should be legal provided the hacker is in Russia?

      • TheBigBrother@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Assange personally hacked the alleged computer in US soil? Cos as I see it he published classified information from outside the US so my question would be, you can be judged for publish classified information of the US even if you are not a US citizen? As far as I know the person/s accountable for the crime are ones who probably right now are working for the US govt…

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is a real win for Biden. Despite all of Trump’s praise for Wikileaks, he did nothing about Assange.

    Of course, this wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t an election year, but it’s still a win.

      • androogee (they/she)@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        This shit is so frustrating.

        YOU apathetic fuckers don’t PAY ATTENTION when it’s not an election year.

        Stuff is still happening when you aren’t looking at it.

    • sunzu@kbin.run
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      why so much downvote…

      This is right, right thing to do and the motive called out is likely true…

      If you disagree, please state your reasoning.

      • credo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        You’re right, the President should basically do nothing in the year before an election. Everything must be accomplished in the first three years, then we take a break.

        Edit: (Assuming POTUS was even involved)