But he never committed a crime in any place where U.S. law has a legitimate reach. It isn't just about criminalizing journalism - it is about criminalizing conduct outside our sovereign territory. We have no basis under either our Constitution or international law to try him. This is lawlessness masquerading as law enforcement; it is nothing but a vendetta.
Spoken like a true curmudgeon! We must be related. If we silence those whom we don’t like, or whose ideas we don’t like, it’s an end of civil society. The extended Curmudgeonly family wants to gruffly shape intellectual discourse, not end it. The fun would end with that.
So, Mr Curmudgeonly, I would, Rather, see comments like yours.
I'm sorry, but being outside the USA is no protection for engaging in criminal conduct. If someone in country X defrauds me I want that person prosecuted. And they can be, given that nation cooperates.
On the other hand, I say that Assange committed no crime. So his location didn't matter.
You wouldn't have a case in the US, you would need to pursue a fraud criminal and/or civil matter in the sovereign jurisdiction where it happened. If there is no law against it there, tough. Just because you're an American doesn't mean you get to over-rule every other country's legal system.
Saudi Arabia criminalizes same-sex sexual activity. So should our governments cooperate with Saudi Arabia and arrest all of the gay people for engaging in criminal conduct (according to Saudi law)? You can't allow one country's laws to be imposed on people outside of that country that they have no jurisdiction over.
Unless, of course, you are someone the US government wants arrested. I recall there was a recent case in Canada where someone, Meng Wanzhou, was detained for years for what was not a crime there.
Then they appointed somebody as head of state of a foreign country.
Then the US stole all the money of Venezuela, Afghanistan, and Russia. They even stole the possessions of Russian citizens who hadn't done anything. That was pretty much declaring themselves a worldwide police state.
I was amazed by all this but US citizens don't seem to feel it anything unusual. After all, it's "the rule of law."
But Matt has held his current position on Assange for awhile now. The jealousy he describes comes from an earlier time. That kind of self-deprecating candor is typical of him. It's one of his strengths.
I came late to this post of Matt's...was celebrating my 81st birthday for way too long😜
Noticed that out of the 441 current comments 201 of them were to you(74) and (126) to JenniferP. How is it that 126 (over 25%) of Matt's readers apparently do not grasp his candor, rather self-deprecating or satirical humor❔
Well, i’ve been a fan of Taibbi’s for years and have heard him interviewed many times. Maybe I derived my sense of his personality through both his journalism and his speech. He’s truly funny, or subtly sardonic, even when the topic is serious. And often the jokes are on him.
I don’t think Matt has a disingenuous bone in his body. He’s one of the good guys.
Well, I could not agree more with everything you've said in both of these posts❗
There was no disparagement of anything you said, or most of the 74 responses to it.
The question I posited addressed the comments at the time of my writing (126 of them) that replied to the same comment you kindly and correctly addressed✔🤷♂️.
I also am a long time patron of Matt Taiibi's extraordinary writing; from his journalistic education and adventures in Moscow, his journalism and editing at The Rolling Stone, his many incredible published books from The Exile* Cir. 2000>Spanking the Donkey* Cir. 2005>Smells Like Dead Elephant* Cir. 2007>The Great Derangement* Cir. 2008> Griftopia* Cir. 2010> The Divide: American Injustice* Cir. 2014> Insane Clown President* Cir. 2017 > HATE Inc.* Cir. 2019 {* signifies personally initialed by the author} and all of his recent work since publishing on SubStack❗
Thom aka EA -- I understood your comment, "Well said." I was just embellishing my first comment a bit, because it occurred to me that maybe I have more exposure than some other folks to the "real Matt Taibbi" as a result of time-in and listening.
I don't feel you were disparaging me. However, I have noticed that reading and responding to comments on these sites can sometimes produce misunderstandings. In fact, maybe I'm misunderstanding you right now. But trust me, I'm delighted to meet another Mattophile.
"I was so brainwashed that I forgot, as many people do, that secrets do not belong to governments. That information belongs to us. Governments rule by our consent. If they want to keep secrets, they must have our permission to do so. And they never have the right to keep crimes secret."
You sound just like any hurt wanna be writer. Sorry, little man, but you called me delusional for pointing out the fact that you follow a pedophile,convicted pedo no less, for your news. Then to think for one minute that blow jiden got 80 million votes, proves your lack of matching brain cells. That part right there is comical. There is nothing but hours of video proof of people stuffing mail in ballot boxes, but you bring up trumps lawsuits because judges can't be owned. You're an imbecile. Go away.
Kemo Sabe, "straight white constitutionally straight man"--bad men never win! He must be stopped. Why do you not defend yourself? You are an easy target! You should be more vigilant! I appear again like the moon. The earth will sleep well tonight. This time I will be ready...Work here is done.
OMGoodness it appears to me that you are the kind of person who thinks that likes to argue with name calling because you have NO FACTS to back your opinions. Firstly, you cannot hurt my feelings because you don’t even know me..how silly of you. Secondly, your prose reads like a 14 year old who gets excited when he/she types nasty insults on a keyboard...how thrilled you must be whenever you ejaculate your words! Are you 14 or possibly 12? Finally, I never engage with ANYONE who talks this way so maybe you could make an argument citing the lawsuits that Trump won proving that the election was stolen. This would really help your argument... if you can’t find any then you shall be ignored by those of us who use logic and acts to come to our conclusions. As you can see here, I typed a whole bunch of words to make my points and I didn’t call you a bad name even once! You can try this too!
And you're a pedophile following jerk off. There is a reason the second amendment says what it says.there is also a reason the declaration says what it says. But obviously with fops like yourself, it's fallen on deaf ears. Look up your buddy. Great credentials until you get to his prison record.
This could be great trolling, but you need to turn down the hysteria notch just a bit to make it truly convincing. As it stands it’s still a bit too cartoonish and unrefined to take seriously, and the key to masterful trolling is to get the world to take you seriously.
It is definitionally a political prosecution to charge someone with violating the Espionage act, a statute created in WWI to criminalize political activity disfavored by the state in the name of protecting national security, a fraudulent pretextual conceit. And due to its infinitely vague, politically manipulable nature, anyone charged under the Espionage Act is sullied by connotations of disloyalty or betrayal to the country.
The other issue is that Assange is not a U.S. citizen. This sets a precedent that anyone in the world could be charged under a law meant to apply to Americans. Is that correct?
Even voters who dislike Trump KNEW he was spilling, like Hedda Hopper at the HUAC. And that helped create a Gordian Knot: how do we prosecute & silence the noisy orange man without being prosecuted ourselves? An empire in the death throes is like a black hole, consuming everything near its power. Assange is right there on the event horizon. Hope we can rescue him.
Yup. Hard to take any of these politicians seriously when they inevitably bring up “The rule of law.” Both parties consistently commit war crimes and disregard constitutional law - and meanwhile the masses dither about Republicans and Democrats. It’s infuriating. But I do give the politicians credit for tapping into the shallowness of the electorate. Was it Bill Maher who said something along the lines of everyone worrying about boys kissing while we’re killing in droves overseas?
The people have been deliberately divided over social issues that are of no importance to the ruling elites whatsoever. People hate their neighbour, who is 99.9999% the same as they as they are, because "pronouns" or some such other triviality. (whenever I say "trivial" - inevitably someone will object strongly, "MY ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT!!")
Nonetheless 'everyone' agrees, "America must call the shots" as Obama said, even if it means 19 million dead in 39 victim countries since WWII. Even if it means couping government after government in the ROW, aka the "target countries". Even if it means applauding while Israel bombs Gaza whenever it wants, for as long as it wants. Even if it means war on Russia.
Now the world faces an 'election' in an America where a popular ex-president is being swept off the board on trumped up charges, all to elect a senescent puppet. 'biden' is not in charge, but he does agree with Obama, the Deep State and the MIC. "World domination or bust!"
"biden" is floating the idea of "pardoning" Trump.
I assume that's down to them understanding that a conviction would likely result in heavy pushback. I also assume that they have come to understand that if they attempt to sweep Trump off the board on trumped up charges, that the Republicans will respond in kind.
This is what I've been screaming from the top of my lungs: U.S. law, if it has been broken, was done so by a non-US citizen. U.S. laws do not have jurisdiction of the entire fucking globe! Fuck our government!
When they were searching for the sub of fools, the Brits wanted to send a submersible, but the report I read said that the Americans had vetoed that idea.
All the charges and fiery rhetoric about treason, espionage and illegal activity will be something argued for years among legal scholars. It won’t matter in the end as he will likely suffer the same fate as Nordstream 2 and Jeffrey Epstein. There are many ways to end his life and you can bet the strategy sessions are well underway as they await his arrival on US soil.
Matt, thanks for stepping up. I know the Plasketts and Wasserman Schultzs of the world will hate you even more for this. I hope you wear that as a badge of honor! As an old "lefty" I thank you from the bottom of my heart for all of your great work.
I wholeheartedly agree. Matt’s work on this issue, and other issues, has been really admirable and tremendously important. And it’s not a left or right thing, it’s truth, very had to get at these days.
I hope he makes it out alive... and I used to not be a huge fan of him either. It would be nice if we had something else happening like wikileaks again. God knows we need it.
Yeah, and ’conservatives’ used to hold up the likes of George W. Bush as standing for ‘American values’ and badger the Dems for being ‘soft on terror’ and ‘against the troops’ when they opposed our disastrous misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. (They even expressed outrage at Biden’s withdrawal of our last troops in the latter.)
I have zero doubt they’ll go that route again if the next Republican president decides to, say, send in troops to fight against Putin’s attempt to conquer Ukraine. They’ll surely find a way to rationalize it. The vast majority of Americans are just cheerleaders for whoever they’ve come to see as ‘their team’ in the national sport of the culture wars. ‘Winning’ (I.e., keeping your team in power) is really all that matters. Whether it’s done under the banner of Bush Jr. Neoconservatism or Trump’s faux populism is of little concern. (Hopefully you don’t need any help finding the proper Democratic analogues)
Dude, if you think there's something wrong with "expressing outrage" at the way the Afghanistan misadventure ended, then you are no better than that "vast majority of Americans (who) are just cheerleaders" whom you disparage.
If one's concern was in at last bringing our troops home from a quixotic attempt to 'civilize' an ungovernable, anarchic staging ground for intertribal feuds at the cost of American lives and treasure, then one had little to be outraged about. Our troops were brought back and, as expected, Afghanistan immediately reverted back to its inevitable failed state status. If those who cheerled Bush's exercise in military futility in the early 2000s had, as they claimed in the Trump years, truly "seen the error of their ways"--recall that they set forth Trump's aversion for foreign engagements as an argument against Hillary--then this ought to be a more than acceptable outcome.
And yet, as if on cue, these same folk began to rant and rave about "the horror" of the chaos that erupted in the wake of our departure, and the "instability" it was going to lead to, as if either was ever going to be avoided in the region we'd just spent billions trying unsuccessfully to prop up. And which, not coincidentally, are the two things the neocons said justified their wars in the first place, both in Afghanistan ("We must end the horror of Islamofascism, and stabilize the unstable place that gave rise to Bin Laden!") and Iraq ("We must end the horrors of Saddam Hussein's rein, and we can't risk an unstable power coming into possession of WMD's!")
Now all that remains is for some new iteration of neoconservatism to win an election against somebody associated with the left flank of our cultural factions and lead these outraged masses back off in support of some new military escapade in the name of "stability", the way so-called "anti-war Democrats" were perfectly happy to go along with Obama's folly in Libya in the name of "humanitarian intervention". Because, again, most people don't *really* care all that much about the outcome and consequences of the war itself, save for those who have had to bear its losses. All that matters is whether the war helps 'your team' or not. If it does, the war is good. If it doesn't the war is bad. Like I said: mindless cheerleaders.
No President in my lifetime has had a clear path of leaving a war zone with the possibility of keeping chaos as low as possible with an orderly withdrawal, protecting American citizens and Afghan allies, and just screwed it up royally. Was it 80+ billion in armaments we left behind for the Taliban? There is no defense, none. If you think even Obama would do something as stupid as that, you deserve Joe Biden as your president. Claim the sell-out-your-country crook.
Obama did something even dumber in his intervention in Libya.
But this is what I mean--an authentic reform of the mindset that led to the cheerleading of the G.W.-era neocon war profiteering would entail a reform of ways of thinking, and especially a recognition of the mistakes that were made, most important among them being a lack of attention to the cultural and political history of the places we invaded.
That reform clearly hasn't happened, otherwise you would easily see that there is no such thing as a non-chaotic pull-out from a place like Afghanistan, just as there is no such thing as an orderly pull-out from a place like Somalia. The concept that there could be is a presumption based on the manufactured neoconservative narrative that the region has some semblance of politico-economic order, that it actually has the structure of a state, like Iraq or Vietnam. Any attempt to actually comprehend the history of Afghanistan would quickly make it quite obvious that this is untrue, and the appearance of any stable, state-like order in the region has always been an illusion held together by occupying powers. Without fail, whenever said powers have withdrawn from it, the latent anarchy that defines it has immediately reasserted itself. But the partisan lens always naturally produces the same "this time is different" rationale.
Note, too, that the 'concern' you express over all the American materiel left there after our withdrawal is the sort of 'concern' that conveniently produces the kind of excuse to 'go back and fix our mistake' that served as rationalizations for our prior interventions. It's almost as if you've forgotten that it was a key aspect of the script used by Bush II in Iraq. ("We know they have WMDs left over from their operations from '62-'91, and clearly they haven't stopped developing them") Again, a truly reformed thinker might look at history and seek to answer questions like "how many American lives were lost at the hands of the huge weapons stockpiles the Soviets left there when they withdrew?" and "Did the feuding tribes there develop these weapons into deadly threats to American safety?" Answers that would instruct them that their supposed 'concern' is misplaced.
That such introspection clearly hasn't happened, either amongst the former supporters of Bush or the supporters of Obama, is proof enough that very little has changed, and that it will be quite easy for some new demagogue to convince their partisan coalition to make the same mistake, so long as it makes their team "look strong" and the other "weak."
It was just a matter of grooming the progressive geeks at Twitter into thinking they were playing a vital role in “saving democracy”. The top secret pillow talk was too much to resist for the Twitter execs and filled them with a false sense of purpose and self importance. Pimps are in awe of the things our security state were able to do.
These progressive geeks had been programmed since kindergarten to believe that the end justifies the means. Not exactly a solid foundation for integrity.
Except those guilty of implementing all of the crime, those responsible for telling Americans and the world that our corrupt admins are destroying our country from within,the fourth estate? Yeah, the press, is part and parcel. They had the responsibility to blab away 24/7. Instead,they helped the corrupt doj/ fbi hide everything, they helped impeach an innocent man twice for things they made up, and then helping to hide the truth to this day.
Surely part of that is that almost all press are Dems, as is all of DC. The totalitarian bureaucracy added to captured corporate press means no truth emerges. Which is why Matt & Michael & Bari & Glenn & Assange are important. Some national security secrets likely need protecting. But exposing govt corruption is always good.
RFK Jr. Is very selective in his criticism of our foreign policy and he is a strong and vocal supporter of Israel and its apartheid state. He is also not a supporter of M4all and he thinks capitalism is just fine. Also vaccines DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM….He isn’t fit to wear Cornel West’s jock strap!
My point Mr.Snarky Pants is that our government vehemently dismisses that there is a connection between the multiple shots given to children under two and the steep increase in autism while having conducted zero studies researching what the cause might be. I will add that there is an alarming amount of anecdotal evidence which the government also poo poos just so you can have another good eye roll. Do you have grandchildren? It’s quite frightening to witness the number of shots and the cost effective bundling of shots. You can stop waiting. I’m not interest in snark offs.
Glad to see Ulbricht not forgotten for once. He is one of the greatest cypherpunks of all time along with Assange and Nakamoto.
His real crime is not the operation of the Silk Road—which whether like it or not, was a platform whose existence reduced violent drug crime and drug related deaths significantly in cities like Baltimore where even local officials approved of it—it is that he took Bitcoin a step further to its logical conclusion; by taking the newly existing ability to perform transactions without the involvement of the State to allow people to trade physical items without the State having a say. He, like Assange and Nakamoto, permanently took power away from the State and opened a Pandora's box that cannot be closed.
That is why they treated him like a drug lord for creating a new form of trade and poisoned the well in his trial unleashing endless media attacks against him with fabricated stories such as him hiring nonexistent darknet hitmen. It is why they did not care he was not the only one running the Silk Road. It is why the FBI was willing to resort to hacking and illegally seizing electronic devices, setting new precedents in Ross Ulbricht v. The United States of America against the Fourth Amendment that was violated in the collection of evidence and the unfair trial and continue to have far reaching consequences today.
No matter what one thinks of him, he should be freed on the basis of not having received a fair trial and the Constitution having been violated. It's absurd he was sentenced to life in prison when he is not someone who is a threat to society, but who instead reduced violence in society. He was, however, a threat to State power.
Crypto is a giant scam facilitated by criminal-con men---nothing less, nothing more. Ulbricht was one of them, but was also mentally ill and had substandard legal representation in his case.
"...by taking the newly existing ability to perform transactions without the involvement of the State to allow people to trade physical items without the State having a say."
RFK Jr or Trump. Those are the declared opponents of the deep state running for president in 2024. This is unprecedented. Two major candidates for president both opposed to the MIC and CIA. The deep state haven't won yet, they just want us to think it's hopeless so we give up. Don't give up.
He didn't and I think he regrets it from the interviews I've seen where he discusses it but you make a good point: he had the power and didn't use it. I heavily prefer RFK Jr by pretty much every measure and this is part of the reason.
Trump should have a lot of regrets. For decades, he teased a presidential run as a business genius who would lead the country into an era of greatness--and relished in coyly denying it when others asked.
Then when he miraculously became president, he spent less time swamp draining and MAGAing and more time tweeting and inserting himself into the melee fending off unprecedented attacks (instead of leaving most of this to a team of competent lawyers).
His behavior after leaving office suggests that he still might like the fight more than the grueling work the fight is over, but as you suggest, maybe less so than when he was in office. Despite being Trump, he might indeed have a few regrets and long for a do-over, like a normal person would after a first term like he had.
I'd consider a vote for Trump, but there are other interesting candidates to think about over the next year plus, RFK Jr among them.
They mean something. Name me a president in living memory who actually showed contrition when confronted with a wrong decision he made. W? Obama? Clinton? They were insincere, warmongering arrogant pigs. I'm not a big fan of Trump: he's vain, narcissistic and un-serious -- and yet he shows more humanity than any of these other assholes that rule over us. But then he didn't spend his entire life climbing the dehumanizing political ladder. That ladder selects out for traits like humanity and humility. Almost anyone from outside that system is better than anyone inside it.
Perhaps also distracted by HRC’s fabrication of Russian collusion, the creation of Crossfire Hurricane, with full knowledge of HRC’s treachery by Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and on & on. With full buy-in by all Dems in going after and twice impeaching a sitting president, think Schiff & Pelosi & Schumer & Nadler. Kamala & Spartacus as attack dogs against Kavanaugh—-shameful. Perhaps some of that was distracting? Hmm.
Trump was bombarded by his 'trusted bootlicking' neocon rinos. I was screaming when you are president you are president. Make your own decisions. The last act of his term should have been an easy one.
Grennell was the last to talk to Trump about Assange. Trump had seemed open to it before. Grennell being CIA dissuaded Trump. Robert Barnes had been trying to secure an Assange release but was not heeded.
Trump is not an opponent of the "deep state." He knows what rhetorical buttons to push in a campaign. As Bill Clinton observed, he is a branding genius. BUT, an opponent of the deep state/Censorship-Industrial-Complex/Mis-Dis-Mal-Information apparatus, etc. does not appoint Rex Tillerson, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, Gen. John Kelly, Gen. James Mattis, Gina Haspel, etc. to leadership positions in his administration! Only a feckless, narcissistic, demagogue would do that!
Well, Trump certainly has the enmity of the deep state. I don't have much faith in his ability to take them on in any serious way but I'll take anti-CIA rhetoric over nothing at all. And Trump did try to make peace with almost all the nations on the US govt's enemies list. He failed for the most part since he doesn't have the discipline or seriousness but at least he tried. Tell me who else we've had in that office since JFK that actually tried to reverse the war state's agenda. To be clear, I much prefer RFK and will definitely support him over Trump. But if its Trump v. Biden or Trump v Hillary or whoever, I'm voting Trump since there's at least a chance he'll follow through this time.
He failed because NOBODY in our Government wanted any of those things. He cannot do it alone. He cannot fight the Uniparty by himself. He cannot fight the D party by himself. He cannot fight the "establishment" RINO's by himself. He couldn't even get them to give him a single penny, not $0.01 for his wall for example.
Trump is no savior. There is no savior other than perhaps in your religion (they realm of the spirit, not man). But you can either choose to fight or not. Trump chose to fight, but didn't have any support because we did not elect them from EITHER party.
We've got to engage from the bottom up. School boards, City Councils, County boards, Sheriffs, DA's. The ship will never turn unless we get control over more oars, no matter what the captain orders.
RFK Jr. He's as anti-police state, anti-CIA, anti-MIC, anti-regulatory agencies, anti-Wall St, anti-BigBanks as it gets. Which is why he'll probably suffer the same fate as his father and uncle. Of course, I pray that doesn't happen.
In a sense you're unintentionally correct. One fact (he's fuckin' crazy as a loon) and one piece of information (he's irrevocably lost in the cosmos). Come back to us, Robert, come back to us...
You can't vote against the interests of the burgeoning police state just like you can't vote against the interests of Goldman or Blackrock or Boeing or Pfizer. Your electoral democracy is a sham.
No, it's a bunch of imbeciles voting for what the hags on the view tell them too, or the fuckers that want a free phone. That's America's voters. Losers.all. Very few with any smarts.
Unfortunately one of the main purposes of prosecuting Assange is to make the next Assange think several times about publishing the truth at all if it pisses off the US government. I’m more concerned that future whistleblowers will be deterred from acting at all than that they’ll end up in court.
Another purpose is captured by a great Brownstone essay on the sadism of the elites: "To show us that they can do it, and in this way, to have us internalize the idea that we are effectively powerless to oppose anything else they choose to medically, culturally, and economically shove down our throats in the coming months and years."
imo, everyone is pretending not to see the elephant in the room, which is the 2016 DNC thumbdrive that Assange published and which greatly helped Trump to get elected. He's not being prosecuted for any other reason. The reason given on the Complaint is just lowest hanging BS that they can charge him with.
That's partly true but not the whole story. The CIA has it in for him -- they developed plans during the Trump administration (Mike Pompeo -- the authoritarian shitheel) to kidnap or assassinate Assange while he was in the Ecuadorean embassy. Not only the early wikileaks release of the collateral murder and other documents showing the war crimes of the US empire, but they also published the Vault 7 CIA document leak which was the largest leak in CIA history. They want blood and it looks like they'll get it.
Yeah, i think the thumbdrive getting the US to go after him was a more likely effect than greatly helping Trump to get elected. The Podesta emails too - Podesta and Tanden looked like the trash that they are.
Something i've been wondering about lately - is any indie journalist keeping tabs on how Podesta is spending that $370 B in green energy grants? Sounds like that's up Fang's alley.
All subsidies and grant programs will have some form of publicly visible scorekeeping system, where the disbursements are published on an ongoing basis. Find the link to the scoreboard, and then follow the dots.
The FBI/CIA also had plans to assassinate the leaders of Occupy Wall Street in several cities, including Seattle,Oakland, Austin, Philadelphia and NYC.
So, the FBI/CIA have been a crimianl enterprisefor a long time.,
The CIA put a lot of pressure on him. I also read that Trump offered to pardon him if he would reveal the source for the DNC emails wikileaks published -- that they didn't come from the Russians -- since that would take some pressure off Trump during the Russiagate nonsense. Assange refused to reveal his source to Trump but did offer a reward for information about the murder of Seth Rich, which basically revealed that he was the source without stating it outright. I saw a post-presidency interview with Trump where he seemed quite regretful that he didn't. Crazy times.
We've all seen the Zapruder film -- even the version the CIA didn't tamper with. The thing is, they can't do it again with all the cameras around these days -- and even if they did manage it via poison or something, the huge dam holding back all the dirty shit they've been up to since WWII will finally break and take the whole scummy lot down. It's almost broken now: with guys like Tucker Carlson and RFK Jr loudly declaring the CIA's complicity in the Kennedy assassinations it's only a matter of time anyway.
Yep. Not an admirable move. He did seem contrite about his decision to not pardon Assange but I could be reading into his body language in that interview. I'm not a big fan of Trump to be clear. That said I find him less reprehensible than creeps like Biden and Obama -- he's actually less of a liar, or a less accomplished liar, and therefore more human to me. And far less of a warmonger.
He alienated the Republicans (Bush/ Cheney and Collateral Murder) and alienated the Democrats (not only the Incorruptible Hillary and Her DNC, but also Obama/Biden/ Hillary and their Granai women and children.)
Maybe he thought as an Australian he need not be subject to American rules?
Perhaps Putin could exchange "journalist" Evan Gershkovich for Assange (although even Julian would be against that guilt by association)?
As an Australian he absolutely is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US Espionage Act. But the US govt has now declared the entire world under US jurisdiction as part of the "rules based international order".
You must be joking! The US invades countries killing millions. More millions through sanctions. Read the report from Brown university, 4.7 millions just since 9/11 and only ~ 1 M kinetically. Over a million children through dhiorrea disease alone. What do you think killed those 500K Iraqi children Madalyn Albright said that was worth it.
You would think that if all those countries NEEDED invasion, that every member of the EU would be onboard and a good portion of the UN also. The invasion would not even be necessary because a united earth would have required those tyrants to be stuck in their countries with their wealth and no guns resulting in their own people eventually eating them (perhaps literally). But you see, most of the world doesn't care. If they don't, I am not sure why we should. Nor do I see how our "caring" makes any difference other than body counts, more money for our military industrial complex, and more money for foreign countries helping them evade sanctions. See who runs Afghanistan today for example.
I get your point but I am not sure I can agree. I think the security state apparatus would have found a way, just as they did with Trump. This is not an endorsement of Trump, but rather an indictment of the lawless behavior (both domestically and internationally) of the security state apparatus. Note: when I write "lawless" I am referring to running operations against the American public. The CIA is expressly prohibited from doing this. The FBI may have some weasel room given some "anti-terror" changes to our laws, e.g, The Patriot Act. I am not a lawyer, if I am wrong about this I would like to know, and by that I don't mean just telling me I'm wrong but with citations.
edit: I don't want to ignore the other aspect; AFAIK the invasion of Iraq was in violation of international law.
I'm not convinced that the DNC thumbdrive greatly helped Trump get elected. Is there any data on this? I remain convinced that it was Clinton herself, and her tone-deaf, arrogant, and incompetent campaign that did the job all on its own.
I can't see it changing many presumed Democratic Clinton voters to vote for Trump. If anyone, i would think it maybe persuaded some Bernie Sanders voters to vote for someone else, or sit it out.
I wrote in Sanders. But i was never, ever under any circumstances going to vote for Trump or Clinton anyway. I was glad to have the info from the hack, but it wasn't surprising to me. It just confirmed what i basically suspected anyway. No effect on my vote whatsoever.
That was a big one, but I suppose it was Vault Seven that really did whatfor. These days the CIA is more powerful than the DNC. And Vault Seven can legitimately be seen as harmful to the national security of the USA. You know what that means.
I too went 180 on Assange. Truth be told, I did the same on Matt. I was pretty sure he had horns when he wrote for RS. Talk about strange bedfellows, it was actually Tucker who turned me around in Assange (or the gamer kid) with the simple “why so many secrets”? Matt said it better though, reminding me these are “our secrets”. Keep it up. Great piece.
Thanks Matt! I've been saying for a very long time that all you need to know about western societies is two words Julian Assange. Like Harari says, the constitution is Bullshit, rule of law Bullshit the educational industrial complexes are creators of the Overton Window that prevents you from critical thinking and they're Bullshit democracy, really, more like engineering consent form Bernays or manufactured consent form Chomsky, ALL Bullshit. Last year and likely this year, the biggest construction projects in the US were "data centers"; what does that Tell you? They own you and you don't even know it, have a nice day Winston and learn to love big brother!
Assange must be freed. Yes, his truths will shed greater light on the nefarious actions of some prominent political leaders... and that’s just too effing bad. Their bad, not sad. Hillary Clinton continues her harangues of “ no one is above the law” and that should include her lying, guilty ass.
But with respect to "If Assange is successfully extradited and convicted, it will take about ten minutes for it to happen again." I fear that the punishment of Assange so far has already done all it needs to do. Journalists are too scared to tell the truth. That was the plan. It already worked.
Free Assange for justice. Journalism already licks the boot that kicks it.
Well said, Matt.
Assange must be freed because journalism is not a crime.
I still don't like Assange.
But he never committed a crime in any place where U.S. law has a legitimate reach. It isn't just about criminalizing journalism - it is about criminalizing conduct outside our sovereign territory. We have no basis under either our Constitution or international law to try him. This is lawlessness masquerading as law enforcement; it is nothing but a vendetta.
I'm going to revise your post: he never committed a crime.....PERIOD.
Fair - the Espionage Act belongs in the garbage bin of history.
Yes, the Espionage Act: another catastrophic legacy of that "Progresssive" leader Woodrow Wilson.
If Assange's case actually makes it to trial we might have a chance at getting rid of it.
That's an enormous gamble, though.
A government will never, never give up a mechanism with which to persecute those who go against the official narrative.
Our government will murder him the second they get their hands on him.
Before, if they see a chance.
Spoken like a true curmudgeon! We must be related. If we silence those whom we don’t like, or whose ideas we don’t like, it’s an end of civil society. The extended Curmudgeonly family wants to gruffly shape intellectual discourse, not end it. The fun would end with that.
So, Mr Curmudgeonly, I would, Rather, see comments like yours.
I'm sorry, but being outside the USA is no protection for engaging in criminal conduct. If someone in country X defrauds me I want that person prosecuted. And they can be, given that nation cooperates.
On the other hand, I say that Assange committed no crime. So his location didn't matter.
You wouldn't have a case in the US, you would need to pursue a fraud criminal and/or civil matter in the sovereign jurisdiction where it happened. If there is no law against it there, tough. Just because you're an American doesn't mean you get to over-rule every other country's legal system.
Saudi Arabia criminalizes same-sex sexual activity. So should our governments cooperate with Saudi Arabia and arrest all of the gay people for engaging in criminal conduct (according to Saudi law)? You can't allow one country's laws to be imposed on people outside of that country that they have no jurisdiction over.
Don't ask me, I just work here.
I'll take that as a no then
You'll can take it up with the boss.
What if that crime is not a crime where that person is? Caveat emptor.
I'm no expert on international law, but I expect your request of an arrest and extradition would fail.
Unless, of course, you are someone the US government wants arrested. I recall there was a recent case in Canada where someone, Meng Wanzhou, was detained for years for what was not a crime there.
They said she had defrauded a US bank. It seemed bogus to me. I thought it was a big event in world history. https://science1arts2and3politics.substack.com/p/when-the-united-states-of-america
Then they appointed somebody as head of state of a foreign country.
Then the US stole all the money of Venezuela, Afghanistan, and Russia. They even stole the possessions of Russian citizens who hadn't done anything. That was pretty much declaring themselves a worldwide police state.
I was amazed by all this but US citizens don't seem to feel it anything unusual. After all, it's "the rule of law."
Maybe. But what if THAT day, or for THAT person it didn't? We talk about fraud, but what about blasphemy laws?
There is negotiation. Though in some cases the USA has dared to kidnap in other countries people it doesn't like. Is that a new thing I wonder.
This is as SIMPLE as that; there are forces that don't want people to realize it...
a crime is whatever the people in power say a crime is. when evil rules, the good are criminals.
It will be very soon. Thoughts nowadays are grounds for severe penalties. Indoctrination is acceptable even desired. Human freedom is on a precipice.
Very well said. So there's a few journalists who get it and don't mind standing up to tyranny. Just a few.
Kudos for your honesty about your prior position.
I think that your recent experience with the Twitter files, and in front of the House Committee, probably gave you new perspective.
Perhaps.
But Matt has held his current position on Assange for awhile now. The jealousy he describes comes from an earlier time. That kind of self-deprecating candor is typical of him. It's one of his strengths.
@ Beeswax🎯
Well said🙌
I came late to this post of Matt's...was celebrating my 81st birthday for way too long😜
Noticed that out of the 441 current comments 201 of them were to you(74) and (126) to JenniferP. How is it that 126 (over 25%) of Matt's readers apparently do not grasp his candor, rather self-deprecating or satirical humor❔
Well, i’ve been a fan of Taibbi’s for years and have heard him interviewed many times. Maybe I derived my sense of his personality through both his journalism and his speech. He’s truly funny, or subtly sardonic, even when the topic is serious. And often the jokes are on him.
I don’t think Matt has a disingenuous bone in his body. He’s one of the good guys.
@ Beeswax👀💡
Well, I could not agree more with everything you've said in both of these posts❗
There was no disparagement of anything you said, or most of the 74 responses to it.
The question I posited addressed the comments at the time of my writing (126 of them) that replied to the same comment you kindly and correctly addressed✔🤷♂️.
I also am a long time patron of Matt Taiibi's extraordinary writing; from his journalistic education and adventures in Moscow, his journalism and editing at The Rolling Stone, his many incredible published books from The Exile* Cir. 2000>Spanking the Donkey* Cir. 2005>Smells Like Dead Elephant* Cir. 2007>The Great Derangement* Cir. 2008> Griftopia* Cir. 2010> The Divide: American Injustice* Cir. 2014> Insane Clown President* Cir. 2017 > HATE Inc.* Cir. 2019 {* signifies personally initialed by the author} and all of his recent work since publishing on SubStack❗
What did you not understand about "Well said🙌"❔
Thom aka EA -- I understood your comment, "Well said." I was just embellishing my first comment a bit, because it occurred to me that maybe I have more exposure than some other folks to the "real Matt Taibbi" as a result of time-in and listening.
I don't feel you were disparaging me. However, I have noticed that reading and responding to comments on these sites can sometimes produce misunderstandings. In fact, maybe I'm misunderstanding you right now. But trust me, I'm delighted to meet another Mattophile.
"I was so brainwashed that I forgot, as many people do, that secrets do not belong to governments. That information belongs to us. Governments rule by our consent. If they want to keep secrets, they must have our permission to do so. And they never have the right to keep crimes secret."
Right on, Matt!
A stirring reminder, if not call to arms.
We've had our call to arms. When the landslide election of PDT was stolen, that morning we should have been heading to dc, armed for bear, or moose.
You sound just like any hurt wanna be writer. Sorry, little man, but you called me delusional for pointing out the fact that you follow a pedophile,convicted pedo no less, for your news. Then to think for one minute that blow jiden got 80 million votes, proves your lack of matching brain cells. That part right there is comical. There is nothing but hours of video proof of people stuffing mail in ballot boxes, but you bring up trumps lawsuits because judges can't be owned. You're an imbecile. Go away.
Kemo Sabe, "straight white constitutionally straight man"--bad men never win! He must be stopped. Why do you not defend yourself? You are an easy target! You should be more vigilant! I appear again like the moon. The earth will sleep well tonight. This time I will be ready...Work here is done.
thats right and the quarters of all the govt employees, lobbysist, and staffer should have been the targets for loot and burn.
OMGoodness it appears to me that you are the kind of person who thinks that likes to argue with name calling because you have NO FACTS to back your opinions. Firstly, you cannot hurt my feelings because you don’t even know me..how silly of you. Secondly, your prose reads like a 14 year old who gets excited when he/she types nasty insults on a keyboard...how thrilled you must be whenever you ejaculate your words! Are you 14 or possibly 12? Finally, I never engage with ANYONE who talks this way so maybe you could make an argument citing the lawsuits that Trump won proving that the election was stolen. This would really help your argument... if you can’t find any then you shall be ignored by those of us who use logic and acts to come to our conclusions. As you can see here, I typed a whole bunch of words to make my points and I didn’t call you a bad name even once! You can try this too!
you are delusional
And you're a pedophile following jerk off. There is a reason the second amendment says what it says.there is also a reason the declaration says what it says. But obviously with fops like yourself, it's fallen on deaf ears. Look up your buddy. Great credentials until you get to his prison record.
This could be great trolling, but you need to turn down the hysteria notch just a bit to make it truly convincing. As it stands it’s still a bit too cartoonish and unrefined to take seriously, and the key to masterful trolling is to get the world to take you seriously.
It is definitionally a political prosecution to charge someone with violating the Espionage act, a statute created in WWI to criminalize political activity disfavored by the state in the name of protecting national security, a fraudulent pretextual conceit. And due to its infinitely vague, politically manipulable nature, anyone charged under the Espionage Act is sullied by connotations of disloyalty or betrayal to the country.
The other issue is that Assange is not a U.S. citizen. This sets a precedent that anyone in the world could be charged under a law meant to apply to Americans. Is that correct?
Charged or killed with Hellfire missiles.
Even American citizens as in the case of Anwar al Awlaki, and then, two weeks later, Abdul, his 16 year old Denver born son.
The drone assassination programme is a war crime from start to finish. Buhs, Obama, Trump, they all loved it.
Even voters who dislike Trump KNEW he was spilling, like Hedda Hopper at the HUAC. And that helped create a Gordian Knot: how do we prosecute & silence the noisy orange man without being prosecuted ourselves? An empire in the death throes is like a black hole, consuming everything near its power. Assange is right there on the event horizon. Hope we can rescue him.
Yup. Hard to take any of these politicians seriously when they inevitably bring up “The rule of law.” Both parties consistently commit war crimes and disregard constitutional law - and meanwhile the masses dither about Republicans and Democrats. It’s infuriating. But I do give the politicians credit for tapping into the shallowness of the electorate. Was it Bill Maher who said something along the lines of everyone worrying about boys kissing while we’re killing in droves overseas?
You got it.
The people have been deliberately divided over social issues that are of no importance to the ruling elites whatsoever. People hate their neighbour, who is 99.9999% the same as they as they are, because "pronouns" or some such other triviality. (whenever I say "trivial" - inevitably someone will object strongly, "MY ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT!!")
Nonetheless 'everyone' agrees, "America must call the shots" as Obama said, even if it means 19 million dead in 39 victim countries since WWII. Even if it means couping government after government in the ROW, aka the "target countries". Even if it means applauding while Israel bombs Gaza whenever it wants, for as long as it wants. Even if it means war on Russia.
Now the world faces an 'election' in an America where a popular ex-president is being swept off the board on trumped up charges, all to elect a senescent puppet. 'biden' is not in charge, but he does agree with Obama, the Deep State and the MIC. "World domination or bust!"
At least trump got real war criminals. Obeyme, not so much. Biden, not so much.
Think of a politicized DOJ charging Obama et al with murder for that.
Not so far-fetched anymore...
"biden" is floating the idea of "pardoning" Trump.
I assume that's down to them understanding that a conviction would likely result in heavy pushback. I also assume that they have come to understand that if they attempt to sweep Trump off the board on trumped up charges, that the Republicans will respond in kind.
Welcome to Ameristan!
#imrankhan
Actually it is. Brown democrats will never be charged with crimes.
Actually what “is”? What, pray tell, is a Brown Democrat?
This is what I've been screaming from the top of my lungs: U.S. law, if it has been broken, was done so by a non-US citizen. U.S. laws do not have jurisdiction of the entire fucking globe! Fuck our government!
fuck the usg, but dont call it "our" government. there not one thing that this government does for any second of the day that repressnts me.
When they were searching for the sub of fools, the Brits wanted to send a submersible, but the report I read said that the Americans had vetoed that idea.
The Titanic is in international waters.
What?
Had to let the sub story dominate the news during the Biden bribery roll out.
Yes, I believe so.
All the charges and fiery rhetoric about treason, espionage and illegal activity will be something argued for years among legal scholars. It won’t matter in the end as he will likely suffer the same fate as Nordstream 2 and Jeffrey Epstein. There are many ways to end his life and you can bet the strategy sessions are well underway as they await his arrival on US soil.
Matt, thanks for stepping up. I know the Plasketts and Wasserman Schultzs of the world will hate you even more for this. I hope you wear that as a badge of honor! As an old "lefty" I thank you from the bottom of my heart for all of your great work.
I wholeheartedly agree. Matt’s work on this issue, and other issues, has been really admirable and tremendously important. And it’s not a left or right thing, it’s truth, very had to get at these days.
I can’t smash that Like button hard or often enough, Matt. THANK YOU.
Bravo, Matt. Thank you for your courage in speaking out on Assange's behalf.
I hope he makes it out alive... and I used to not be a huge fan of him either. It would be nice if we had something else happening like wikileaks again. God knows we need it.
Remember when “progressives” supported Wikileaks because it exposed the tomfoolery of the war in Iraq? But that was because Bush was President.
Remember when “progressives” opposed the Patriot Act? But that was because Bush was President.
We need the reporting of people like Matt, and others, to help educate people that this monkey business is not party dependent.
Yes, and the "neocons" Bill Kristol and Co. have taken over the Democrats...https://rumble.com/v2v7jny-system-update-show-102.html
The neocons haven't "taken over the Democrats". They joined up with kindred spirits.
Yes, that is even a better description...thank you
I hate those bastards more than I despise the left. The neocons are traitors, straight up. Kristol should be banned from above ground.
Why poison worms?
Yeah, and ’conservatives’ used to hold up the likes of George W. Bush as standing for ‘American values’ and badger the Dems for being ‘soft on terror’ and ‘against the troops’ when they opposed our disastrous misadventures in Iraq and Afghanistan. (They even expressed outrage at Biden’s withdrawal of our last troops in the latter.)
I have zero doubt they’ll go that route again if the next Republican president decides to, say, send in troops to fight against Putin’s attempt to conquer Ukraine. They’ll surely find a way to rationalize it. The vast majority of Americans are just cheerleaders for whoever they’ve come to see as ‘their team’ in the national sport of the culture wars. ‘Winning’ (I.e., keeping your team in power) is really all that matters. Whether it’s done under the banner of Bush Jr. Neoconservatism or Trump’s faux populism is of little concern. (Hopefully you don’t need any help finding the proper Democratic analogues)
Dude, if you think there's something wrong with "expressing outrage" at the way the Afghanistan misadventure ended, then you are no better than that "vast majority of Americans (who) are just cheerleaders" whom you disparage.
If one's concern was in at last bringing our troops home from a quixotic attempt to 'civilize' an ungovernable, anarchic staging ground for intertribal feuds at the cost of American lives and treasure, then one had little to be outraged about. Our troops were brought back and, as expected, Afghanistan immediately reverted back to its inevitable failed state status. If those who cheerled Bush's exercise in military futility in the early 2000s had, as they claimed in the Trump years, truly "seen the error of their ways"--recall that they set forth Trump's aversion for foreign engagements as an argument against Hillary--then this ought to be a more than acceptable outcome.
And yet, as if on cue, these same folk began to rant and rave about "the horror" of the chaos that erupted in the wake of our departure, and the "instability" it was going to lead to, as if either was ever going to be avoided in the region we'd just spent billions trying unsuccessfully to prop up. And which, not coincidentally, are the two things the neocons said justified their wars in the first place, both in Afghanistan ("We must end the horror of Islamofascism, and stabilize the unstable place that gave rise to Bin Laden!") and Iraq ("We must end the horrors of Saddam Hussein's rein, and we can't risk an unstable power coming into possession of WMD's!")
Now all that remains is for some new iteration of neoconservatism to win an election against somebody associated with the left flank of our cultural factions and lead these outraged masses back off in support of some new military escapade in the name of "stability", the way so-called "anti-war Democrats" were perfectly happy to go along with Obama's folly in Libya in the name of "humanitarian intervention". Because, again, most people don't *really* care all that much about the outcome and consequences of the war itself, save for those who have had to bear its losses. All that matters is whether the war helps 'your team' or not. If it does, the war is good. If it doesn't the war is bad. Like I said: mindless cheerleaders.
As for foreign military engagement in general, more rubble, less trouble or don't go at all.
No President in my lifetime has had a clear path of leaving a war zone with the possibility of keeping chaos as low as possible with an orderly withdrawal, protecting American citizens and Afghan allies, and just screwed it up royally. Was it 80+ billion in armaments we left behind for the Taliban? There is no defense, none. If you think even Obama would do something as stupid as that, you deserve Joe Biden as your president. Claim the sell-out-your-country crook.
Obama did something even dumber in his intervention in Libya.
But this is what I mean--an authentic reform of the mindset that led to the cheerleading of the G.W.-era neocon war profiteering would entail a reform of ways of thinking, and especially a recognition of the mistakes that were made, most important among them being a lack of attention to the cultural and political history of the places we invaded.
That reform clearly hasn't happened, otherwise you would easily see that there is no such thing as a non-chaotic pull-out from a place like Afghanistan, just as there is no such thing as an orderly pull-out from a place like Somalia. The concept that there could be is a presumption based on the manufactured neoconservative narrative that the region has some semblance of politico-economic order, that it actually has the structure of a state, like Iraq or Vietnam. Any attempt to actually comprehend the history of Afghanistan would quickly make it quite obvious that this is untrue, and the appearance of any stable, state-like order in the region has always been an illusion held together by occupying powers. Without fail, whenever said powers have withdrawn from it, the latent anarchy that defines it has immediately reasserted itself. But the partisan lens always naturally produces the same "this time is different" rationale.
Note, too, that the 'concern' you express over all the American materiel left there after our withdrawal is the sort of 'concern' that conveniently produces the kind of excuse to 'go back and fix our mistake' that served as rationalizations for our prior interventions. It's almost as if you've forgotten that it was a key aspect of the script used by Bush II in Iraq. ("We know they have WMDs left over from their operations from '62-'91, and clearly they haven't stopped developing them") Again, a truly reformed thinker might look at history and seek to answer questions like "how many American lives were lost at the hands of the huge weapons stockpiles the Soviets left there when they withdrew?" and "Did the feuding tribes there develop these weapons into deadly threats to American safety?" Answers that would instruct them that their supposed 'concern' is misplaced.
That such introspection clearly hasn't happened, either amongst the former supporters of Bush or the supporters of Obama, is proof enough that very little has changed, and that it will be quite easy for some new demagogue to convince their partisan coalition to make the same mistake, so long as it makes their team "look strong" and the other "weak."
It was just a matter of grooming the progressive geeks at Twitter into thinking they were playing a vital role in “saving democracy”. The top secret pillow talk was too much to resist for the Twitter execs and filled them with a false sense of purpose and self importance. Pimps are in awe of the things our security state were able to do.
These progressive geeks had been programmed since kindergarten to believe that the end justifies the means. Not exactly a solid foundation for integrity.
Too bad nobody cares.
Except those guilty of implementing all of the crime, those responsible for telling Americans and the world that our corrupt admins are destroying our country from within,the fourth estate? Yeah, the press, is part and parcel. They had the responsibility to blab away 24/7. Instead,they helped the corrupt doj/ fbi hide everything, they helped impeach an innocent man twice for things they made up, and then helping to hide the truth to this day.
Surely part of that is that almost all press are Dems, as is all of DC. The totalitarian bureaucracy added to captured corporate press means no truth emerges. Which is why Matt & Michael & Bari & Glenn & Assange are important. Some national security secrets likely need protecting. But exposing govt corruption is always good.
Whom do we vote for to dismantle this burgeoning police state here in the US? I honestly don’t know at this point.
To my knowledge, only JFK Jr has publicly stated he would pardon both Assange and Snowden.
RFK Jr.Yes, another reason I’m supporting him.
RFK Jr. Is very selective in his criticism of our foreign policy and he is a strong and vocal supporter of Israel and its apartheid state. He is also not a supporter of M4all and he thinks capitalism is just fine. Also vaccines DO NOT CAUSE AUTISM….He isn’t fit to wear Cornel West’s jock strap!
Can you cite studies that prove vaccinating does not cause autism? I cannot find any govt studies. Thank you!
If you could cite specific vaccines that your referring to that would really help us do some research....I’ll wait...
My point Mr.Snarky Pants is that our government vehemently dismisses that there is a connection between the multiple shots given to children under two and the steep increase in autism while having conducted zero studies researching what the cause might be. I will add that there is an alarming amount of anecdotal evidence which the government also poo poos just so you can have another good eye roll. Do you have grandchildren? It’s quite frightening to witness the number of shots and the cost effective bundling of shots. You can stop waiting. I’m not interest in snark offs.
Vivek Ramaswamy has said he will free Assange, Snowden, and Ulbricht
https://twitter.com/search?q=vivek%20snowden&src=typed_query
Glad to see Ulbricht not forgotten for once. He is one of the greatest cypherpunks of all time along with Assange and Nakamoto.
His real crime is not the operation of the Silk Road—which whether like it or not, was a platform whose existence reduced violent drug crime and drug related deaths significantly in cities like Baltimore where even local officials approved of it—it is that he took Bitcoin a step further to its logical conclusion; by taking the newly existing ability to perform transactions without the involvement of the State to allow people to trade physical items without the State having a say. He, like Assange and Nakamoto, permanently took power away from the State and opened a Pandora's box that cannot be closed.
That is why they treated him like a drug lord for creating a new form of trade and poisoned the well in his trial unleashing endless media attacks against him with fabricated stories such as him hiring nonexistent darknet hitmen. It is why they did not care he was not the only one running the Silk Road. It is why the FBI was willing to resort to hacking and illegally seizing electronic devices, setting new precedents in Ross Ulbricht v. The United States of America against the Fourth Amendment that was violated in the collection of evidence and the unfair trial and continue to have far reaching consequences today.
No matter what one thinks of him, he should be freed on the basis of not having received a fair trial and the Constitution having been violated. It's absurd he was sentenced to life in prison when he is not someone who is a threat to society, but who instead reduced violence in society. He was, however, a threat to State power.
Reading Ross manifesto brought tears to my eyes; he is so wrongly imprisoned 💔
Crypto is a giant scam facilitated by criminal-con men---nothing less, nothing more. Ulbricht was one of them, but was also mentally ill and had substandard legal representation in his case.
"...by taking the newly existing ability to perform transactions without the involvement of the State to allow people to trade physical items without the State having a say."
Which means nothing. Pro-crypto is pro-crime.
Wow, Emma, you blew my mind with this, did not know any of it. Thanks.
Bingo! And people wonder why so many of us don't trust our government.
Some others wonder why you're so gullible to cheap and obvious propaganda.
https://twitter.com/VivekGRamaswamy/status/1666828655274721282?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw
I agree with Vivek on this issue too…but my cat would be a better President than he would.
If voting could actually change anything substantial, it would be illegal.
RFK Jr or Trump. Those are the declared opponents of the deep state running for president in 2024. This is unprecedented. Two major candidates for president both opposed to the MIC and CIA. The deep state haven't won yet, they just want us to think it's hopeless so we give up. Don't give up.
But Trump did not pardon Assange, Snowden (or Ross Albright...I know not the same reason but still) and he could have.
He didn't and I think he regrets it from the interviews I've seen where he discusses it but you make a good point: he had the power and didn't use it. I heavily prefer RFK Jr by pretty much every measure and this is part of the reason.
Trump should have a lot of regrets. For decades, he teased a presidential run as a business genius who would lead the country into an era of greatness--and relished in coyly denying it when others asked.
Then when he miraculously became president, he spent less time swamp draining and MAGAing and more time tweeting and inserting himself into the melee fending off unprecedented attacks (instead of leaving most of this to a team of competent lawyers).
His behavior after leaving office suggests that he still might like the fight more than the grueling work the fight is over, but as you suggest, maybe less so than when he was in office. Despite being Trump, he might indeed have a few regrets and long for a do-over, like a normal person would after a first term like he had.
I'd consider a vote for Trump, but there are other interesting candidates to think about over the next year plus, RFK Jr among them.
Fight is what is required. Mainly because we have all become fat, rich, and complacent.
They mean something. Name me a president in living memory who actually showed contrition when confronted with a wrong decision he made. W? Obama? Clinton? They were insincere, warmongering arrogant pigs. I'm not a big fan of Trump: he's vain, narcissistic and un-serious -- and yet he shows more humanity than any of these other assholes that rule over us. But then he didn't spend his entire life climbing the dehumanizing political ladder. That ladder selects out for traits like humanity and humility. Almost anyone from outside that system is better than anyone inside it.
Perhaps also distracted by HRC’s fabrication of Russian collusion, the creation of Crossfire Hurricane, with full knowledge of HRC’s treachery by Obama, Brennan, Clapper, Comey, and on & on. With full buy-in by all Dems in going after and twice impeaching a sitting president, think Schiff & Pelosi & Schumer & Nadler. Kamala & Spartacus as attack dogs against Kavanaugh—-shameful. Perhaps some of that was distracting? Hmm.
Trump was bombarded by his 'trusted bootlicking' neocon rinos. I was screaming when you are president you are president. Make your own decisions. The last act of his term should have been an easy one.
If memory serves, he has explained that he was pressured (bribed or blackmailed by McConnell and Graham, I think) not to.
Grennell was the last to talk to Trump about Assange. Trump had seemed open to it before. Grennell being CIA dissuaded Trump. Robert Barnes had been trying to secure an Assange release but was not heeded.
Trump had the opportunity to pardon Assange and he didn't. Trump cannot be trusted to do this.
Trump is not an opponent of the "deep state." He knows what rhetorical buttons to push in a campaign. As Bill Clinton observed, he is a branding genius. BUT, an opponent of the deep state/Censorship-Industrial-Complex/Mis-Dis-Mal-Information apparatus, etc. does not appoint Rex Tillerson, John Bolton, Mike Pompeo, Gen. John Kelly, Gen. James Mattis, Gina Haspel, etc. to leadership positions in his administration! Only a feckless, narcissistic, demagogue would do that!
Well, Trump certainly has the enmity of the deep state. I don't have much faith in his ability to take them on in any serious way but I'll take anti-CIA rhetoric over nothing at all. And Trump did try to make peace with almost all the nations on the US govt's enemies list. He failed for the most part since he doesn't have the discipline or seriousness but at least he tried. Tell me who else we've had in that office since JFK that actually tried to reverse the war state's agenda. To be clear, I much prefer RFK and will definitely support him over Trump. But if its Trump v. Biden or Trump v Hillary or whoever, I'm voting Trump since there's at least a chance he'll follow through this time.
The incredible attacks he faced suggest that Trump was over a critical target or two.
If Trump were not a real enemy of the Deep State, they would not have invested the time and money that they do in destroying him.
Yes, and he is a real enemy because he tried to bring peace to many of conflicts the deep state and it's masters profit from.
He failed because NOBODY in our Government wanted any of those things. He cannot do it alone. He cannot fight the Uniparty by himself. He cannot fight the D party by himself. He cannot fight the "establishment" RINO's by himself. He couldn't even get them to give him a single penny, not $0.01 for his wall for example.
Trump is no savior. There is no savior other than perhaps in your religion (they realm of the spirit, not man). But you can either choose to fight or not. Trump chose to fight, but didn't have any support because we did not elect them from EITHER party.
I see Trump as an exponent of randomness. But random evil is better than focused evil.
Or a non-polatician that has a trust issue with bootlickers.
Trump could have stopped Sec. of State Pompeo from charging Assange under the Espionage Act, but he didn’t. Fuck him.
Which is why our political parties are busily harvesting the 40% who could care less.
More whistleblowers
We've got to engage from the bottom up. School boards, City Councils, County boards, Sheriffs, DA's. The ship will never turn unless we get control over more oars, no matter what the captain orders.
I pretty sure when they steal 2024, you will see what we will do.
RFK Jr
RFK Jr. He's as anti-police state, anti-CIA, anti-MIC, anti-regulatory agencies, anti-Wall St, anti-BigBanks as it gets. Which is why he'll probably suffer the same fate as his father and uncle. Of course, I pray that doesn't happen.
RFK Jr. is also the perfect candidate for low-information voters.
You are (unintentionally) correct. His candidacy will absolutely provide voters the FACTUAL information they need to make an EDUCATED decision.
In a sense you're unintentionally correct. One fact (he's fuckin' crazy as a loon) and one piece of information (he's irrevocably lost in the cosmos). Come back to us, Robert, come back to us...
Ad hominems are not a valid argument. What SPECIFICALLY makes him "crazy" in your opinion?
The fact that he's crazy is what makes RFK Jr crazy, in my opinion.
You can't vote against the interests of the burgeoning police state just like you can't vote against the interests of Goldman or Blackrock or Boeing or Pfizer. Your electoral democracy is a sham.
No, it's a bunch of imbeciles voting for what the hags on the view tell them too, or the fuckers that want a free phone. That's America's voters. Losers.all. Very few with any smarts.
Hags, fuckers, and losers---I daresay a rather pithy summation of the American electorate.
"If you’re okay with this happening to one Julian Assange, you’d better be okay with it happening to many others."
Your own self, as well, dear readers.
Unfortunately one of the main purposes of prosecuting Assange is to make the next Assange think several times about publishing the truth at all if it pisses off the US government. I’m more concerned that future whistleblowers will be deterred from acting at all than that they’ll end up in court.
Another purpose is captured by a great Brownstone essay on the sadism of the elites: "To show us that they can do it, and in this way, to have us internalize the idea that we are effectively powerless to oppose anything else they choose to medically, culturally, and economically shove down our throats in the coming months and years."
https://brownstone.org/articles/the-sadism-factor/
They will end up Epstein'd.
imo, everyone is pretending not to see the elephant in the room, which is the 2016 DNC thumbdrive that Assange published and which greatly helped Trump to get elected. He's not being prosecuted for any other reason. The reason given on the Complaint is just lowest hanging BS that they can charge him with.
That's partly true but not the whole story. The CIA has it in for him -- they developed plans during the Trump administration (Mike Pompeo -- the authoritarian shitheel) to kidnap or assassinate Assange while he was in the Ecuadorean embassy. Not only the early wikileaks release of the collateral murder and other documents showing the war crimes of the US empire, but they also published the Vault 7 CIA document leak which was the largest leak in CIA history. They want blood and it looks like they'll get it.
I think if you take away the 2016 DNC thumbdrive, the US would not be going after him like they are. The earlier Iraq war leak is inconsequential.
Yeah, i think the thumbdrive getting the US to go after him was a more likely effect than greatly helping Trump to get elected. The Podesta emails too - Podesta and Tanden looked like the trash that they are.
Something i've been wondering about lately - is any indie journalist keeping tabs on how Podesta is spending that $370 B in green energy grants? Sounds like that's up Fang's alley.
All subsidies and grant programs will have some form of publicly visible scorekeeping system, where the disbursements are published on an ongoing basis. Find the link to the scoreboard, and then follow the dots.
Thanks, I'll check it out.
The FBI/CIA also had plans to assassinate the leaders of Occupy Wall Street in several cities, including Seattle,Oakland, Austin, Philadelphia and NYC.
So, the FBI/CIA have been a crimianl enterprisefor a long time.,
At least since J. Edgar Hoover...
Why do you think Trump didn't pardon him?
The CIA put a lot of pressure on him. I also read that Trump offered to pardon him if he would reveal the source for the DNC emails wikileaks published -- that they didn't come from the Russians -- since that would take some pressure off Trump during the Russiagate nonsense. Assange refused to reveal his source to Trump but did offer a reward for information about the murder of Seth Rich, which basically revealed that he was the source without stating it outright. I saw a post-presidency interview with Trump where he seemed quite regretful that he didn't. Crazy times.
Look up Vault 7 . I Don’t usually trust Wikipedia because the deep state censors it, but OMG. You HAVE to read it. I was schocked.
Someone on here mentioned it, but I can’t find their post.
Thanks to the person who posted it.
I'm sure Trump saw the Zapruder film.
We've all seen the Zapruder film -- even the version the CIA didn't tamper with. The thing is, they can't do it again with all the cameras around these days -- and even if they did manage it via poison or something, the huge dam holding back all the dirty shit they've been up to since WWII will finally break and take the whole scummy lot down. It's almost broken now: with guys like Tucker Carlson and RFK Jr loudly declaring the CIA's complicity in the Kennedy assassinations it's only a matter of time anyway.
Don’t fool yourself... Not even close. These guys have a plan and it’s the same thing G.Carlin said about that club.
The CIA are the club's operatives. And they're far more vulnerable than they ever were. This ain't the Dulles CIA anymore and America is growing up.
So you’re saying Trump refused to pardon Assange because Assange wouldn’t provide a quid pro quo? Sounds above right.
Yep. Not an admirable move. He did seem contrite about his decision to not pardon Assange but I could be reading into his body language in that interview. I'm not a big fan of Trump to be clear. That said I find him less reprehensible than creeps like Biden and Obama -- he's actually less of a liar, or a less accomplished liar, and therefore more human to me. And far less of a warmonger.
Trump pardoning Assange would have further angered the Uniparty. So what would Trump have gotten for it? Satisfaction?
Trump is lacking courage.
Assange is the Trophy of the CIA.
He alienated the Republicans (Bush/ Cheney and Collateral Murder) and alienated the Democrats (not only the Incorruptible Hillary and Her DNC, but also Obama/Biden/ Hillary and their Granai women and children.)
Maybe he thought as an Australian he need not be subject to American rules?
Perhaps Putin could exchange "journalist" Evan Gershkovich for Assange (although even Julian would be against that guilt by association)?
As an Australian he absolutely is not subject to the jurisdiction of the US Espionage Act. But the US govt has now declared the entire world under US jurisdiction as part of the "rules based international order".
Especially when one considers he wasn't on US soil. There are huge amounts of hubris undergirding these charges. America: World Police indeed...
You must be joking! The US invades countries killing millions. More millions through sanctions. Read the report from Brown university, 4.7 millions just since 9/11 and only ~ 1 M kinetically. Over a million children through dhiorrea disease alone. What do you think killed those 500K Iraqi children Madalyn Albright said that was worth it.
You would think that if all those countries NEEDED invasion, that every member of the EU would be onboard and a good portion of the UN also. The invasion would not even be necessary because a united earth would have required those tyrants to be stuck in their countries with their wealth and no guns resulting in their own people eventually eating them (perhaps literally). But you see, most of the world doesn't care. If they don't, I am not sure why we should. Nor do I see how our "caring" makes any difference other than body counts, more money for our military industrial complex, and more money for foreign countries helping them evade sanctions. See who runs Afghanistan today for example.
there are a lot of actions that can be strung together, but I think if you take away the 2016 DNC thumbdrive, Assange would be a free man right now.
I get your point but I am not sure I can agree. I think the security state apparatus would have found a way, just as they did with Trump. This is not an endorsement of Trump, but rather an indictment of the lawless behavior (both domestically and internationally) of the security state apparatus. Note: when I write "lawless" I am referring to running operations against the American public. The CIA is expressly prohibited from doing this. The FBI may have some weasel room given some "anti-terror" changes to our laws, e.g, The Patriot Act. I am not a lawyer, if I am wrong about this I would like to know, and by that I don't mean just telling me I'm wrong but with citations.
edit: I don't want to ignore the other aspect; AFAIK the invasion of Iraq was in violation of international law.
Politics trump all else in DC.
I'm not convinced that the DNC thumbdrive greatly helped Trump get elected. Is there any data on this? I remain convinced that it was Clinton herself, and her tone-deaf, arrogant, and incompetent campaign that did the job all on its own.
I can't see it changing many presumed Democratic Clinton voters to vote for Trump. If anyone, i would think it maybe persuaded some Bernie Sanders voters to vote for someone else, or sit it out.
I wrote in Sanders. But i was never, ever under any circumstances going to vote for Trump or Clinton anyway. I was glad to have the info from the hack, but it wasn't surprising to me. It just confirmed what i basically suspected anyway. No effect on my vote whatsoever.
Data? We don't need no steenking data.
That was a big one, but I suppose it was Vault Seven that really did whatfor. These days the CIA is more powerful than the DNC. And Vault Seven can legitimately be seen as harmful to the national security of the USA. You know what that means.
If not him, someone else would have published the thumb drive.
I too went 180 on Assange. Truth be told, I did the same on Matt. I was pretty sure he had horns when he wrote for RS. Talk about strange bedfellows, it was actually Tucker who turned me around in Assange (or the gamer kid) with the simple “why so many secrets”? Matt said it better though, reminding me these are “our secrets”. Keep it up. Great piece.
Let Assange out and lock up all the Neocons that accelerated the surveillance state!
Yeah, but Obama retribution would make the q anon grandma happy....
"Can't be done!" Says the cathedral...
Thanks Matt! I've been saying for a very long time that all you need to know about western societies is two words Julian Assange. Like Harari says, the constitution is Bullshit, rule of law Bullshit the educational industrial complexes are creators of the Overton Window that prevents you from critical thinking and they're Bullshit democracy, really, more like engineering consent form Bernays or manufactured consent form Chomsky, ALL Bullshit. Last year and likely this year, the biggest construction projects in the US were "data centers"; what does that Tell you? They own you and you don't even know it, have a nice day Winston and learn to love big brother!
Why do you reject the love of Big Brother? He only wants to guide and protect you.
Assange must be freed. Yes, his truths will shed greater light on the nefarious actions of some prominent political leaders... and that’s just too effing bad. Their bad, not sad. Hillary Clinton continues her harangues of “ no one is above the law” and that should include her lying, guilty ass.
Spot on, Matt.
But with respect to "If Assange is successfully extradited and convicted, it will take about ten minutes for it to happen again." I fear that the punishment of Assange so far has already done all it needs to do. Journalists are too scared to tell the truth. That was the plan. It already worked.
Free Assange for justice. Journalism already licks the boot that kicks it.
Fear of unemployment was enough already. Shades of Phil Donahue.