Joe Biden does not care about the first amendment

[repoman]

So if Assange gets convicted, how would an exact (as possible) repeat of the Pentagon Papers be legally handled going forward?

 

[ZiprHead]

What Assange is accused of per wiki:

On 11 April 2019, the day of Assange's arrest in London, the indictment against him was unsealed.[364] He was charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion (i.e. hacking into a government computer), which carries a maximum 5-year sentence.[365][366] The charges stem from the allegation that Assange attempted and failed to crack a password hash so that Chelsea Manning could use a different username to download classified documents and avoid detection.[170] This information had been known since 2011 and was a component of Manning's trial; the indictment did not reveal any new information about Assange.

 

[RVonse]

But what I will say for sure is that our media needs to be fixed or we are all in big trouble.

You want to do that by government regulation or let the invisible hand of the free market do it?

It should be a rewarding experience for a journalist to seek out and inform the public of the truth.

It should be but real journalism costs time, effort, and money. Bullshit generates clicks for free and that is quite the media conglomerates are buying out local media and consolidating themselves into aggregator machines that don't generate any meaningful or informative content. They are giving the public what the majority of the public wants. Entertainment and dazzle. So, it needs to be fixed. Will the market fix itself?

For starters, antitrust moves needed to bust them up. The big players like timewarner and others that conglomerated during the Clinton administration need to be broken down again. Making them small again will allow free market competition to work again. Which hopefully the ones telling the truth will then be able to flourish versus the liars. Futhermore, more independent outlets will guard against a monopoly attempting to make the news instead of reporting the news.

 

[RVonse]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAXJrcjpEcE

And Biden is doing it right out in the open for all to see. Seeking to extradite Assange (who is not even a US citizen) for telling the truth and prosecuting this journalist for being a journalist.

Whether he's a US citizen or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether he should be extradited. Extradition is based on where the crime was committed, not where the person lives.

And he's not about getting the truth out there--what he chose to leak was deliberately designed to harm the US rather than simply shed light in dark corners. For example, manuals which are only of interest to those trying to kill US troops. The equivalent would be doing an expose on you with pictures of your house keys and all your credit card numbers in it.

Fair enough. But how do you establish credibility unless you show the details? If he had redacted any of it then the government would have been able to just tell us it was all bull shit. They tried their best to do that as it was.

It is a bit off topic to this thread but Snowden actually attempted to be careful about damage to the government at first. And his superiors just laughed at him. Assange could have used bad judgement but just because he happened to do damage to your favorite politicians is not reason enough to call him a Russian agent either IMO.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAXJrcjpEcE

And Biden is doing it right out in the open for all to see. Seeking to extradite Assange (who is not even a US citizen) for telling the truth and prosecuting this journalist for being a journalist.

Whether he's a US citizen or not has absolutely nothing to do with whether he should be extradited. Extradition is based on where the crime was committed, not where the person lives.

And he's not about getting the truth out there--what he chose to leak was deliberately designed to harm the US rather than simply shed light in dark corners. For example, manuals which are only of interest to those trying to kill US troops. The equivalent would be doing an expose on you with pictures of your house keys and all your credit card numbers in it.

Fair enough. But how do you establish credibility unless you show the details? If he had redacted any of it then the government would have been able to just tell us it was all bull shit. They tried their best to do that as it was.

It is a bit off topic to this thread but Snowden actually attempted to be careful about damage to the government at first. And his superiors just laughed at him. Assange could have used bad judgement but just because he happened to do damage to your favorite politicians is not reason enough to call him a Russian agent either IMO.

Snowden and Assange are very different cases. I have a lot of sympathy for Snowden, none for Assange.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

You want to do that by government regulation or let the invisible hand of the free market do it?



It should be but real journalism costs time, effort, and money. Bullshit generates clicks for free and that is quite the media conglomerates are buying out local media and consolidating themselves into aggregator machines that don't generate any meaningful or informative content. They are giving the public what the majority of the public wants. Entertainment and dazzle. So, it needs to be fixed. Will the market fix itself?

For starters, antitrust moves needed to bust them up. The big players like timewarner and others that conglomerated during the Clinton administration need to be broken down again. Making them small again will allow free market competition to work again. Which hopefully the ones telling the truth will then be able to flourish versus the liars. Futhermore, more independent outlets will guard against a monopoly attempting to make the news instead of reporting the news.

That is a spit in the bucket but I agree. The problem is capitalism.

We have competition but in the form of niche markets each of which allies itself to a major political party. We also need the Fairness Doctrine. And we need to reverse the SC decision that money is speech and we need to add more transparency to dark money. We should not have oligarchs like Trump and Bloomberg impacting elections to the extent they did.

All the side effects of capitalism have to be mitigated, not merely one.