this post was submitted on 08 Feb 2024
141 points (82.2% liked)

Memes

51612 readers
1865 users here now

Rules:

  1. Be civil and nice.
  2. Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] purplepuppy@links.hackliberty.org 38 points 1 year ago (21 children)

This is how Trump won in the first place, wikileaks published emails of Hilary's campaign doing this. Instead of critisizing her for being responsible for Trump, democrats blamed Russia and attecked Wikileaks as Russian spies, literally called for shooting the messenger.

This is a prime example of why voting for lesser evil is not a tactic in politics and the whole liberal ideology as whole that we just need to vote for right people, instead of removing powerful positions in government in the first place.

[–] rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 year ago (20 children)

The wikileaks thing is highly suspect, though. Like, wikileaks intentionally disclosed a lot of publicly damaging dirt on Clinton and the Dems at a very sensitive time in the election while not releasing ANYTHING on the GOP, even though they supposedly had that information.

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (3 children)

I mean Hilary had been personally, as Secretary of State, responsible for Julian's persecution for years and years, it's no surprise he would have had a grunge against her, with good reasons. It's also highly likely no one from the Dems side thought WikiLeaks was a good avenue for leaks because of it, and so no material was submitted. It's not really suspect, it's just logical.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

How so? I'm sure Clinton was pissed off that he published leaked documents originating from her department, but prosecution is not the role of the Secretary of State in the US government. And besides that, Sweden issued an arrest warrant in November 2010 and she resigned in February 2013. That's what, two years?

[–] wildbus8979@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

https://www.npr.org/2010/11/29/131668950/white-house-aims-to-limit-wikileaks-damage

"Let's be clear. This disclosure is not just an attack on America -- it's an attack on the international community," Clinton said Monday at a State Department news conference. Such leaks, she said, "tear at the fabric" of responsible government.

[...]

Clinton emphasized that she wanted to "make it clear to the American people and to our friends and partners that we are taking aggressive steps" to hold those who leaked the documents to account.

The cable leaks had everything to do with the State Department has it pertained mostly to foreign affairs, and American involvement and meddling in various countries.

The cable leak is what Julian is being prosecuted for right now, not the dropped charges from Sweden. We also now know for a fact that there was a secret indictment in the US the whole time.

[–] pingveno@lemmy.ml 0 points 1 year ago

What you're saying isn't necessarily a contradiction to what I said.

those who leaked the documents to account

Chelsea Manning leaked the documents. I think this was known relatively early on because she said something to a fellow soldier who tipped off their commanders.

And as I said, Clinton was certainly furious, but that doesn't mean she had much to do with Julian Assange being pursued. She wasn't even in office for most of that time.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)
load more comments (17 replies)