Previous post
Some people who are proud conservatives just love Julian Assange. Some, like Judge Andrew Napolitano, call him a “hero” for exposing “information that the American public and the world had the right to see.” And then there’s Tucker Carlson, who said he’s “not here to promote him” (snort!). However, insists Carlson, he’s not as bad as Idi Amin, so give him a break. Plus, “he’s definitely not more anti-American.”
Which is bullshit.
That’s because newly unsealed court documents show that Julian Assange and his wingman/woman/whatever Bradley Manning knew they would hurt Americans when they released military reports.
These prosecution documents, dating from December, 2017, were just released on Monday. They contained information about the “identity and significance of local supporters of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan.”
In fact, one particular WikiLeaks document dump resulted in some of our Afghan allies being killed. How did Assange react?
“Well, they’re informants. So, if they get killed, they’ve got it coming to them. They deserve it.”
Some hero.
Credit: thierry ehrmann @ flickr. CC by 2.0.
The affidavit also shows that Osama bin Laden was a fanboy of Julian Assange. That’s because when SEALs raided his compound they found letters which show he tried to get WikiLeaks information on the Pentagon.
Federal prosecutors, therefore, say that both Assange and Manning knew that leaking these military reports “would cause injury” to the nation. But they didn’t give a rat’s ass.
Let’s see some of the other shenanigans this alleged champion of freedom pulled:
However, Assange has no problemo with Iranians in Yemen or Syria. He doesn’t leak information about Russians in Ukraine. Moreover, he calls Hezbollah “freedom fighters.”
But it’s all okay, since in July, 2016, Julian Assange released all that dirt on the DNC. And then in October, he leaked John Podesta’s emails — Podesta, who was Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman. So it’s all good. Because, as the proverb says, “The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”
Meanwhile, insight on Julian Assange’s stay at the Ecuadorian embassy has also leaked out. Stuff like how he wouldn’t do his dishes, or flush the toilet, or take care of his cat. He even smeared feces on embassy walls. In short, Assange was the Guest from Hell.
We also see how he tried to skateboard in the embassy (badly). Oh, and it appears that he didn’t like a security guard taking his picture. Imagine that!
Julian Assange’s fanboys and girls can try to paint him as a hero of free information, but he’s nothing more than an internet gangster. He hates America, he hates the West, and he’d love nothing more than to undermine the nation, which he calls “oppressive.” It’s also interesting how some conservatives would love to hang Bradley/Chelsea Manning as a traitor from the tallest yard arm, but swoon over Saint Julian Assange.
As blogger Brian Cates wrote about Julian Assange and his creature WikiLeaks:
“They are a far Leftist group made up of — surprise! — far Leftist anarchist types who let their political biases affect just about every g*ddamn thing they do. . . .”“They have only a limited positive function in exposing gov’t corruption as long as they think it will harm/hinder/thwart US interests around the world.”
Julian Assange is no champion of freedom. He hates America, he hates our strength, and he especially despises our military. He doesn’t revere the First Amendment but is more than happy to use its benevolence for heinous purposes. But real heroes are those who wear the uniform to defend the nation, not someone who wants to destroy it by a thousand leaked cuts.
Welcome Instapundit readers!
Featured image: cropped from Newtown graffiti @ flickr. CC by 2.0.
GWB says: Plus, “he’s definitely not more anti-American.”
Which is bullshit.
Well, no, I think you can probably safely say he’s not more anti-American than Idi Amin. I mean, that’s setting a decently high bar. Maybe not as high as Osama or Stalin, but it’s up there. Is he more anti-American than Omar or Bill Ayers? That we could debate.
hurt Americans when they released military reports.
“identity and significance of local supporters of U.S. and allied forces in Afghanistan.”
Note that the folks hurt were not Americans, they were our allies. He was willing to hurt Americans, I think, but it was our allies who got whacked.
“Well, they’re informants. So, if they get killed, they’ve got it coming to them. They deserve it.”
So, if Manning gets whacked, it’s ok? Because s/he/it was an “informant” and therefore has it coming to s/h/it and s/he/it deserves it? Good to know. *smh*
He even smeared feces on embassy walls.
The accusations against him are pure hearsay at this point, and honestly sound pretty far-fetched. (His lawyer has denied the poop-smearing.)
It’s also interesting how some conservatives would love to hang Bradley/Chelsea Manning as a traitor from the tallest yard arm, but swoon over Saint Julian Assange.
Most of the folks (well, the ones who don’t have flexible principles) I’ve seen do that are libertarians, not conservatives. They have tendencies toward contradictions like that.
I do appreciate some of what Wikileaks has exposed (Snowden’s traitorous, but helpfully revealing dump, for one). I don’t like that it requires their anti-American perspective and law-breaking to get that truth. And, that perspective means that even when they might get appropriate information, they tend to crudely throw everything they get against the wall, regardless of its potential for harm. They abuse the First Amendment (while not actually falling under its protection, since none of their servers are in the US, and Assange is not an American).
I hope Assange is tried for conspiracy, since we know he (through Wikileaks) conspired with (at least) Manning to obtain classified information. You can probably also charge him with conspiracy to commit computer crimes (if you can show Wikileaks actually hacked anyone) and espionage. It would be a stretch, but you could go with felony murder if you can connect his release of the information *directly* to the death of any Afghan informant.
WhisBear says: Sad little article… Assange is not in the top 999 American heroes… true. But since he isn’t an American, it seems like a strange point to work in. Printing leaked information the NYT won’t print cuz politics isn’t heroic… but sometimes it’s politically useful. Enduring incarceration for things regularly done by others is one kind of heroic, but I only mention this to stifle the author’s bias. One fallout is people are now aware that classified info has been ridiculously insecure… this has to be a good thing. Assange is neither a villain nor a criminal — that seems like the lede.
GWB says: No, he’s definitely both a villain and a criminal.
And he’s definitely no hero.
Nicki says: Wrong. He’s both. Also a narcissistic asshole. This isn’t the author’s bias. It’s the truth. Stop licking his ass.
Scott says: Assange is a bag of shit, along with the traitors Manning and Snowden. Regardless of the fact that the Podesta emails and some of the info from Snowden exposed corruption in the highest levels of our govt, as GWB points out, that was an accidental side effect of Wiki throwing a big bag of crap against the wall. Assange and his co-conspirators, including those above should receive a fair trail, a blindfold, cigarette, and a bullet… That is all!
GWB says: I prefer a rope, as it’s greener and has fewer visual associations with 20th century tyrannies.
Scott says: Works for me GWB. An actually upon reflection, a firing squad has always been considered an honorable way to go, something these scum definitely don’t deserve.
Tsu Do Nimn says: What’s Assange done to deserve the death penalty? He’s not an American citizen, or an intelligence officer, so he’s not obliged to keep classified secrets.
Scott says: He has taken affirmative action, resulting in the deaths of Americans and their allies. As he is not acting as a uniformed member of a countries military, he is therefore nothing more than a terrorist, and not subject to any protections under the Geneva convention or other treaties, and as with any other spies, can be summarily exectuted..
Tsu Do Nimn says: That may be your interpretation of his actions and desire for his punishment, but it’s not close to reality.
Take a step back, and look at the actual legal documents submitted to get Assange extradited. The indictment doesn’t mention anything about publishing secrets being a crime, which it would, if it were criminal, as proving Assange’s guilt would be trivial and his extradition assured.
But it’s not, because mainstream newspapers have been publishing leaked secret documents that have put people’s lives in danger for ages.
The only crime in the indictment is the claim that Assange conspired with Manning to hack a government computer. That’s it.
Scott says: That is the affirmative action I was speaking of. He conspired with manning. The truth of it is, it’s been decades since anyone was actually prosecuted for treason or espionage, and even longer since anyone has been executed for it. That doesn’t for a second mean that no-one has committed the offense, just that no politicians (and yes I include those in the FBI, CIA, and DOJ) have had the stones to prosecute it to the extent that they should. And no, I have no illusions that they actually will this time around either. That doesn’t mean his actions don’t fit the definition of the crime.
GWB says: He has committed espionage.
Tsu Do Nimn says: No, Manning committed espionage. Tried, found guilty, sentenced to multiple-decades, commuted by Obama.
Assange published leaked documents. Which the New York Times has done countless times.
Scott says: And fr which, if the political will existed, and people in govt. were doing their jobs, they would have been prosecuted for as well.
Nicki says: Assange worked with Manning to get access to STOLEN US property (the classified documents) without regard for the safety of Coalition troops or the poor Afghans who worked to cooperate with them. The Taliban was gloriously happy, because some of the villages in Afghanistan are so tiny, that no name had to be given. They could figure out who the individuals were who cooperated with Coalition forces and targeted them. Not. The. Same. Thing.
GWB says: No, conspiracy legally means you have actually committed the crime.
And, yes, he conspired with Manning and others.
Assange is a scoundrel, but he’s been useful in some ways. He has exposed things about the deep state that deserve exposing, and also helped expose Hilliary’s corruption. We don’t need to endorse him to recognize his instrumental usefulness. Some of his other exposures have done real harm to good guys, for which he should be held accountable.
His net position? That’s for God to determine, not me.
Sarts says: What crime did Assange commit here? You can’t call him a traitor, he’s not American in the first place. He didn’t hack anybody or steal anything, he just published what he was given. It’s kind of a stretch to charge a conspiracy out of that, major newspapers do it all the time. I’m not interested in his personal character, he’s been instrumental in exposing a lot of government fraud on multiple occasions, and gets my thanks for that.
Scott says: No difference between him, and an ISIS “spymaster”, who sends out a call for “lone wolves” to feed him data that can be used to target US assets. He’s not doing anything other than publishing the data he receives… and yet, he would most definitely be targeted. The fact that he happened to release some info that was beneficial to our republic is irrelevant.
GWB says: He didn’t hack anybody or steal anything
So, you don’t understand “conspiracy” then? He has incited others to commit those crimes to his benefit. (Wikileaks has paid for some of that information.) That makes him a principal in the crime.
He doesn’t just publish information gathered through proper investigation – he specifically publishes information really only obtainable through illegal means. So, to provide information to him, you must commit a crime. Ergo: conspiracy.
Mark M. says: Stop being such a deep state tool. If you haven’t figured it out yet skippy, the CIA, NSA and FBI have become a danger to this country, and need to be smashed into a thousand splinters, as Kennedy threatened to do (to the CIA).
Wake up and stop carrying their water, jingoist. Stop giving them the benefit of the doubt. They screwed up the Fall of the Soviet Union. They screwed up Iraqi WMD. They were part and parcel lying about who hacked the DNC for the past two years, in furtherance of a conspiracy to obstruct justice and commit sedition against a duly elected President. They are operating in blatant disregard to the US Constition and Bill of Rights. Snowden was an American hero. Assange did this country an invaluable service. Your other criticisms are the sort of playground thinking I’d expect to hear in a coffeeshop by suburban housewives that don’t understand the rules of evidence.
Scott says: Your first paragraph and a half are spot on. After that, you go off the rails. Talk about a tool, Snowden is no freaking hero, American heros don’t run off to Russia dipshit. Again, since your reading comprehension is apparently limited, just because some beneficial things came out of the actions of Assange and Snowden does not change the fact that A. Snowden is a traitor, and B. Assange is an anarchist that would love to see the west fall.
Recognizing these facts does not for one second mean that I or others do not recognize that the deep state exists, and that it needs to be rooted out and destroyed… It’s also interesting that most examples we’ve seen of the deep state recently have been leftists, as you sho in your comment above “They were part and parcel lying about who hacked the DNC for the past two years, in furtherance of a conspiracy to obstruct justice and commit sedition against a duly elected President.”, yet those most likely to consider Snowden a hero are also leftists.. please explain this dichotomy, if you would.
Mark M. says: Right, because he should have stuck around so he could be in Guantanimo bay until his last tooth falls out of his head?
It should not surprise anyone that’s been watching that the Left has always had a hold on the CIA. They recruited heavily from Yale, had a number of Soviet sympathizers, and believed the Soviet Union was going to win because apparently Reagan was a fool and they are economic illiterates. And where do you get this idea that Assange hates the west? No, Assange hates oppression and spying, and it is long past time you take off those rose colored glasses as ask yourself how it is that an incompetent FBI that repeatedly keeps screwing up and killing Americans by ignoring known wolf after known wolf, and has had three major incidents which have led to the assassination or outright murder of non-combatant American civilians still has morons like Comey and Mueller running around running the place with ZERO accountability or even changes at the top.
While you’re at it, let’s ask why the CIA was so hot on Syria, since that would only be the FOURTH time in 15 years that we had the brilliant idea to “spread democracy” by deposing a relatively stable, secular arab dictator and replacing him with utter chaos.
And you are absolutely wrong about Snowden being a hero to the left, he is also a hero to anyone on the right that thinks the NSA’s massive wiretapping program is totally out of hand and unacceptable to a free people. You know how you know it’s out of hand? When you start learning that the NSA was wiretapping Senators and Congressmen back in the Obama era, or when you learn they are vacuuming up the entire cellular metadata despite the fact that it was unauthorized by the PATRIOT act, or when you learn that they INTERCEPTED THE PHONE CALLS OF THE AMERICAN PRESIDENT WHEN HE’S TALKING TO FOREIGN LEADERS. Wake up.
Scott says: Again, Just because Snowden exposed those things does not make him a hero. Motive matters, and running to our enemy exposes that, or makes it more clear.
You seem to be laboring under the idea that you can either condemn Assange, or the corruption in our govt that you point out. The thing is, it’s perfectly reasonable to see Assange for the threat that he is (while we MUST have more transparency and accountability if our Republic is to survive, we must also have the ability to act clandestinely against our enemies to protect that republic, this is a distinction Assange does not make, nor even care about. As for Snowden being a hero to the left, I sadly have family members who think pink hats are great, and are somewhere left of Bernie Sanders, and they LOVE him..
That being said, you are spot on about the CIA, FBI, and NSA wiretapping, and the fact that it needs to be reigned in, and those responsible held accountable. The Patriot act was in many ways a knee jerk reaction to 9/11. While many parts of it were needed to prevent intelligence failures that allowed that day to happen as it did, it also failed to include sufficient safeguards to prevent abuse, and when Obama took over, it was no longer a knee jerk, he had plenty of time to consider things, and expanded it dramatically. The fact that Snowden bought this to light is indeed a good thing, but he did it to damage this country, and he also released other info that could only hurt our nation. For these things, he also needs to be held accountable.
GWB says: No, Assange hates oppression and spying
Bullsh*t. He is an Alinskyite, at best.
Everything else you said there is … huh? Why are you yelling at Scott about that? He agrees. He and I just think you’re a fool if you don’t think Assange is part of the movement to destroy Western Civ as we know it.
GWB says: Wake up and stop carrying their water, jingoist.
Well, that pretty much puts the slant on *your* opinion. *smdh*
Snowden was an American hero.
No, he was not. He committed espionage. He should hang for it.
And, yes, I also can appreciate that he helped expose some things going on in the ‘deep state’.
He still committed espionage.
Nicki says: OMG – who the hell is this idiot?
Mordwa says: Assange isn’t American. Why should he love the US? He has an outsiders view, and no allegiance is mandatory to a foreigner.
Dan says: This entire post is basically just a huge tantrum. He has opinions you don’t like, he did things you don’t like, etc. No actual talking about *CRIMES*. Here’s a hint – it’s not a criminal offense for a journalist to take information from a source and publish it. It’s still not against the law even if that information is confidential or classified if that information is of the public interest. What Manning did WAS a crime. Assange taking and publishing his info is not – because of the public interest regarding what was published.
The reality is that Tucker Carlson’s view on the situation is correct – Assange is being railroaded because he embarrassed the wrong people.
As an aside – we actually don’t have evidence that Assange conspired with Manning to obtain classified documents. If Assange actually helped Manning get those documents then that is a crime – him taking and publishing the documents after the fact is not a crime otherwise. There was speculation about Assange helping Manning crack passwords to get the documents but there is no evidence of it thus far.
If you think we should be hunting people down, smearing them, and charging them with false crimes because you heard that they “hate Americans” then you will swallow the prosecution of just about anyone the deep state or their corporate media pals wants.
GWB says: Assange taking and publishing his info is not
Assange didn’t merely take info that was offered up. He incited the commission of that crime.
we actually don’t have evidence that Assange conspired with Manning to obtain classified documents
Actually, there are messages between the two showing that. He doesn’t have to help him, merely incite him to commit the crime for his own benefit.
(And, btw, the very existence of Wikileaks is an incitement, as I noted above. You don’t have to like it, but that would be a very valid reading of law – common and statute.)
a happy little debunker says: He is not American.
So what if he doesn’t like Americans?
Ratus says: “…is no champion of freedom. He hates America, he hates our strength, and he especially despises our military. He doesn’t revere the First Amendment but is more than happy to use its benevolence for heinous purposes.” But how is this different than most Europeans, the Media and Democrats (BIRM).
“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.” Yes, that is the proverb, but you should be able to understand that the enemy of my enemy is just my enemy’s enemy nothing more.
1776 says: Typical boot-licking baby boomer nonsense. This line of thinking is exactly why we continue to engage in endless wars that undermined our national security, why we continue to see out-of-control spending in Washington, and why our personal freedoms/liberties continue to be eroded with each passing year. Neocons like Kim Hirsch are not conservatives. They statists with a friendly smile and a bible.
Melissa says: It is possible to walk and chew gum at the same time. We can say that Assange did harm to this country and is anti-American without wanting our country involved in foreign conflicts. Geez.
GWB says: Oh fer cryin’ out loud.
This is the kind of idiocy that the left uses to paint all conservatives as mouth-breathing morons.
(BTW, do you even know what a “neocon” IS? I doubt it.)
And Melissa nails it.
John C. says: Maxim 29: “The enemy of my enemy is my enemy’s enemy. No more. No less.”
Normie-American says: Assange is not an American and never was. He owes nothing to America. It is absurd that he be charged with violating any American law when he was never a citizen or resident of America and so never subject to its laws.
If America is to have borders then it must also recognize bounds. If American legal jurisdiction de facto encompasses the whole world then the idea of a national border is contradictory as whole world is de facto granted citizenship by that jurisdiction.
Melissa says: Good points, but the U.S. government hasn’t snatched Assange from the U.K.
Scott says: So the Russians charged under the Meuller probe shouldn’t have been charged, because they’re not Americans? Sorry, that dog don’t hunt..
And yes, I believe that the probe was a witch hunt instigated by Clinton and the deep state
Mark M. says: They shouldn’t have been charged because they didn’t do anything illegal. Gawd you’re a gullible, deep state tool.
Scott says: Sorry dude, I’ve tried to be nice, but you’re a one trick pony. Anyone who takes action against the US is subject to the laws of our country. For example, if someone that is not a citizen, outside of our country, takes actions to crash the stock market, under international law, they can be charged in our courts. If they took action against another country, you’re right, we would have no jurisdiction.
To follow your “logic” Our courts taking action in freeing Iranian assets, charging the Lockerbie bombers etc. would all be inappropriate..again, you’re clearly delusional.
And to accuse me of being a tool of the deep state? You’re a complete jackass! anyone who know me in the least, or has read any of my posts in the past knows that I am a huge advocate for dismantling the deep state. Please try to limit the crack smoking before posting.
GWB says: My word, you are a moron.
GWB says: You don’t have to be a citizen to be subject to our laws. *smdh*
dsimmons says: As I noted over at Instapundit where you linked this, Assange openly stated what he intended to do: https://cryptome.org/0002/ja-conspiracies.pdf
He views the national security state as a clandestine conspiracy, and he has reasonable grounds for doing so. He defines the computational power of any one of those conspiracies as a function of how many participating nodes can securely communicate – and that math is actually sound. He announced his intention to attack those conspiracies by exposing their communications, in order to reduce their computational power.
That plan is advanced by revealing ANY secrets, regardless of what they are. Stopping to ask “Will revealing this secret hurt American interests?” would go directly against the entire intent of his undertaking, which is to undermine a particular sort of interest – the advantage gained by being able to act clandestinely. There’s no way to undermine that interest successfully without imposing costs on the people and organizations directly involved in the clandestine activity. Imposing costs is the entire mechanism here. So I’m not sure he hates Americans – to him, it’s just information theory. It’s math.
GWB says: Well put.
Luke says: He’s a foreigner. He has no obligation or expectation of acting for our benefit.
Scott says: You’re 100% correct on that. You also managed to completely miss the point of the post, which I believe to be that you need to remember exactly what you just said before being a cheerleader for this POS..
CuriousDave says: I don’t think Assange is a hero. It is possible that he is anti-American. The facts which lie between those two extremes coalesce around the things he knows, such as the source of the DNC server e-mails which claims did NOT come from a state source. I, for one, would like to know whether that source was Seth Rich.
48 Comments