[they] hide behind the letter of the law. In this case, the U.S. Constitution doesn't protect against the Feds spying on people suspected of colluding with a declared "enemy of the state," or someone accused of having and sharing classified info, which Assange has been accused of being by no less than 3 "separate" Admins.
Whether, or not, it's true Assange was handling classified intel is up for debate. What isn't up for debate, is that the current whistleblower protections don't include "whistleblowing" to an org like WikiLeaks. Only properly vetted and approved whistleblower outlets are covered under the current "Whislteblower's 'Protection' Act."
I suspect there's more than a kernel of truth when the uniParty says Assange violated U.S. law when taking in docs from whistleblowers. Which would make his prosecution justifiable under even the "color of law" argument.
He's not as squeaky clean as people around here think. No body in the media world is. He's been trying to subvert America for a while now, attempting to expose anyone he thinks may be "guilty" of malfeasance, regardless of possible affiliations and info they have. Which makes me think he's actually an agent working for the AUS Intel community. Sort of like how Epstain was a purported double agent for Mossad/C_A.
Don't get me wrong, he's done some good, but remember, not everything [they] say are lies. There is always a measure of truth to what [they] say.
[they] hide behind the letter of the law. In this case, the U.S. Constitution doesn't protect against the Feds spying on people suspected of colluding with a declared "enemy of the state," or someone accused of having and sharing classified info, which Assange has been accused of being by no less than 3 "separate" Admins.
Whether, or not, it's true Assange was handling classified intel is up for debate. What isn't up for debate, is that the current whistleblower protections don't include "whistleblowing" to an org like WikiLeaks. Only properly vetted and approved whistleblower outlets are covered under the current "Whislteblower's 'Protection' Act."
I suspect there's more than a kernel of truth when the uniParty says Assange violated U.S. law when taking in docs from whistleblowers. Which would make his prosecution justifiable under even the "color of law" argument.
He's not as squeaky clean as people around here think. No body in the media world is. He's been trying to subvert America for a while now, attempting to expose anyone he thinks may be "guilty" of malfeasance, regardless of possible affiliations and info they have. Which makes me think he's actually an agent working for the AUS Intel community. Sort of like how Epstain was a purported double agent for Mossad/C_A.
Don't get me wrong, he's done some good, but remember, not everything [they] say are lies. There is always a measure of truth to what [they] say.