politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Someone has to publish and put it into the public domain like Wikileaks did. Of course, at that point they will be liable and be charged with using stolen material and sued. But, hey, take one for the team.
so what's stopping "someone"? there are infinity minus one randos on the internet willing to host juicy hot leaks for whatever ulterior motives.
What happened to Julian Assange is what's stopping someone. And he wasn't even in the US.
Julian assange got off Scot free in the end
He spent over a decade imprisoned and pled guilty to something that's clearly first amendment protected activity, I wouldn't call that Scot free.
"First amendment"... ? So you think it's fine to release information you know will lead to murder of innocent people, are warned repeatedly, you do it anyway, and that's all fine.
And this is to say nothing of the women who credibly claim he raped them.
And this is where you're supposed to link to a specific instance of anyone who got murdered due to the leaks, because that didn't happen, he redacted the files to avoid this.
As for the ghosting charge, I agree he should've stood trial in Sweden for that.
Why are you so confident you know what happened? It's incalculable what exact consequences there were, but many people who worked with him testified in a documentary that he was warned many times innocent people would die and he emphatically did not care
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Steal_Secrets:_The_Story_of_WikiLeaks
Again, any example of a case of an innocent person dying, or even a CIA officer or anything like that. There's none.
An entire documentary is not good enough for you so this is a pointless conversation where you care nothing about truth
The wiki article doesn't mention anything like that, I'm not watching a whole documentary. If there's anything true to the claim you made, there would be a news article about it somewhere. Any innocent person being murdered because of something published by Wikileaks, shouldn't be hard to find if it existed, no?
I very obviously sent the article so you knew which documentary I meant. If you care about the truth you would watch it
I mean in the past hackers posted a lot of data online without getting caught...like the Ashley Madison hack for example. You don't have to use a middleman journalist to post it
So, like Assange in the early days and not the unkempt vagrant we see at the end.