f7ben Posted May 24, 2019 Author Share Posted May 24, 2019 11 hours ago, Zambroski said: How does this mean the 4th is gone? This is more on the 1st being “gone” (which it isn’t...and either is the 4th). This will go nowhere on most charges but if they can prove he conspired with that freak to steal items pertaining to national security, well...trouble. But even then, the freak has just been hand slapped so, what can they do to the messenger? I don’t see much coming from this. Dems want him dead for him pimping out their lies, fraud and deceit of the American people. R’s want to make sure he won’t do it to them. Verdict: He’ll be eating one night in the jail mess hall, choke on a chicken bone and a bullet will fall out of his ear. @Anler 18 minutes ago, jtssrx said: The only person the 4th applies to is Manning. Assange isn’t a United States citizen. Trump could ultimately pardon both Assange and Manning. I don’t like it that either is jailed. Manning is really getting fucked as he was already jailed for this. Can you say double Jeopardy Total of 146 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 3 hours ago, f7ben said: Total of 146 Keep up with your bullshit and I’m gonna violate your 4th by searching and seizing the contents of your smoker this weekend....and I’m bringing bootlickers to hold you at gunpoint while I do it!!!!! PS...get some ribs. K thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted May 24, 2019 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 24, 2019 16 hours ago, f7ben said: Fuck Donald Trump Fucking fascist piece of filth https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/23/wikileaks-co-founder-julian-assange-charged-with-17-new-criminal-counts.html Trump does not have support with his social media followers on this. Be interesting to watch as this moves forward. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 3 minutes ago, Highmark said: Trump does not have support with his social media followers on this. Be interesting to watch as this moves forward. I think he’s gonna cut him loose. I’m actually interested to see how the msm’s are handling this with Assange. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XC.Morrison Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 (edited) 13 minutes ago, Zambroski said: I think he’s gonna cut him loose. I’m actually interested to see how the msm’s are handling this with Assange. There likely won't be any need to "cut him loose" as these latest actions work to lessen the chances that he'll ever be extradited here. This is more about putting all journalists "on notice" not to publish leaked info or Trump will come after you too. The uproar could make it easier for Assange’s lawyers in the U.K. — where he is currently serving a 50-week jail term for violating bail — to argue that he is wanted in the United States primarily for embarrassing the Pentagon and State Department, by publishing true information obtained from a whistleblower, making the charges against him political in nature, rather than criminal. That would make his transfer to Virginia at the end of his jail term in London unlawful, since Article 4 of the U.S.-U.K. extradition treaty, signed in 2003, clearly states that “extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense.” https://theintercept.com/2019/05/24/julian-assange-espionage-act-us-extradition/ Edited May 24, 2019 by XC.Morrison Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Highmark Posted May 24, 2019 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 24, 2019 13 minutes ago, Zambroski said: I think he’s gonna cut him loose. I’m actually interested to see how the msm’s are handling this with Assange. The big difference here is the claim that Assange help Manning with the hack or gathering of the information. If they were just given it like Snowden did there would be no charges against a media organization. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 1 minute ago, XC.Morrison said: There likely won't be any need to "cut him loose" as these latest actions work to lessen the chances that he'll ever be extradited here. This is more about putting all journalists "on notice" not to publish leaked info or I'll come after you too. The uproar could make it easier for Assange’s lawyers in the U.K. — where he is currently serving a 50-week jail term for violating bail — to argue that he is wanted in the United States primarily for embarrassing the Pentagon and State Department, by publishing true information obtained from a whistleblower, making the charges against him political in nature, rather than criminal. That would make his transfer to Virginia at the end of his jail term in London unlawful, since Article 4 of the U.S.-U.K. extradition treaty, signed in 2003, clearly states that “extradition shall not be granted if the offense for which extradition is requested is a political offense.” https://theintercept.com/2019/05/24/julian-assange-espionage-act-us-extradition/ That works for me too. Indeed, the press need to be “put on notice”. Their own oath is now a punchline. Publishing and spewing lies and misinformation daily doesn’t qualify for being an earnest vehicle for public information. Libel and slander suits need to start being the norm. So does having them produce some type or reasonable evidence of solid sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zambroski Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, Highmark said: The big difference here is the claim that Assange help Manning with the hack or gathering of the information. If they were just given it like Snowden did there would be no charges against a media organization. Right. I mentioned that in my first post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted May 24, 2019 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 24, 2019 https://www.democracynow.org/2019/5/24/exclusive_julian_assange_s_attorney_decries?utm_source=Democracy+Now!&utm_campaign=4c7ce42519-Daily_Digest_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_fa2346a853-4c7ce42519-192342525 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anler Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 "For the first time in the history of our country the govt has brought criminal charges against the publisher for the publication of truthful information" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 19 hours ago, Zambroski said: How does this mean the 4th is gone? This is more on the 1st being “gone” (which it isn’t...and either is the 4th). This will go nowhere on most charges but if they can prove he conspired with that freak to steal items pertaining to national security, well...trouble. But even then, the freak has just been hand slapped so, what can they do to the messenger? I don’t see much coming from this. Dems want him dead for him pimping out their lies, fraud and deceit of the American people. R’s want to make sure he won’t do it to them. Verdict: He’ll be eating one night in the jail mess hall, choke on a chicken bone and a bullet will fall out of his ear. @Anler It’s Ben being a drama queen and pretending hes a lawyer who can dissect the fourth amendment into real world applications, and render a legal opinion. I have heard both sides of this argument, given by some really smart people. After 911 things of changed whether we like it or not. He will continue to foam at the mouth about it and call everybody retards, but the fact remains the good of the nation outweighs the good of the individual. That said if there are abuses, and I am sure there have been, then that needs to also be routed out and remedies instituted. We’re talking about something that affects .00001% of the population. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anler Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 2 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: It’s Ben being a drama queen and pretending hes a lawyer who can dissect the fourth amendment into real world applications, and render a legal opinion. I have heard both sides of this argument, given by some really smart people. After 911 things of changed whether we like it or not. He will continue to foam at the mouth about it and call everybody retards, but the fact remains the good of the nation outweighs the good of the individual. That said if there are abuses, and I am sure there have been, then that needs to also be routed out and remedies instituted. We’re talking about something that affects .00001% of the population. Save this post for when they come to neuter the 2nd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 Just now, Anler said: Save this post for when they come to neuter the 2nd. If you say so Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platinum Contributing Member Jimmy Snacks Posted May 24, 2019 Platinum Contributing Member Share Posted May 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, Anler said: Save this post for when they come to neuter the 2nd. 3 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: If you say so Yeah Anler is you say so...Mark heard some really smart people say that the erosion of our rights is a good thing!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 12 minutes ago, Jimmy Snacks said: Yeah Anler is you say so...Mark heard some really smart people say that the erosion of our rights is a good thing!!!!! Your reading comprehension is terrible. Did you mean to say that you have not read legal arguments on both sides of the issue? If you haven’t you’re not very well read. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManOnManOral Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 27 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: Your reading comprehension is terrible. Did you mean to say that you have not read legal arguments on both sides of the issue? If you haven’t you’re not very well read. 27 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: Your reading comprehension is terrible. Did you mean to say that you have not read legal arguments on both sides of the issue? If you haven’t you’re not very well read. The question is. Did you break bread with these brilliant minds and were they jews? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 13 minutes ago, ManOnManOral said: The question is. Did you break bread with these brilliant minds and were they jews? Like Smales reading comprehension skills, your quoting skills are terrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anler Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 43 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: Your reading comprehension is terrible. Did you mean to say that you have not read legal arguments on both sides of the issue? If you haven’t you’re not very well read. have you not read the importance of our Bill of Rights? If not you are not very well read... Its never too late https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 1 minute ago, Anler said: have you not read the importance of our Bill of Rights? If not you are not very well read... Its never too late https://billofrightsinstitute.org/founding-documents/bill-of-rights/ Thanks I’m familiar with it. You can explain to me why it’s OK to disseminate classified information and how that applies to our Bill of Rights? Let’s be clear I am on the fence with Assange and have said so for a long time Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anler Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 1 minute ago, DriftBusta said: Thanks I’m familiar with it. You can explain to me why it’s OK to disseminate classified information and how that applies to our Bill of Rights? Let’s be clear I am on the fence with Assange and have said so for a long time Obviously you are not very well read on the case either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManOnManOral Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 5 minutes ago, DriftBusta said: Like Smales reading comprehension skills, your quoting skills are terrible. Answer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 52 minutes ago, ManOnManOral said: Answer I’ll pass thanks. 52 minutes ago, Anler said: Obviously you are not very well read on the case either. If you think Assanges case is black and white, never mind reading comprehension, you’re just not very bright. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f7ben Posted May 24, 2019 Author Share Posted May 24, 2019 (edited) "Many lawyers appealing to many judges and all serving those with nefarious interests can twist legalese into making it seem as though our rights arent so clear cut" Woolie - 5/24/19 Fucking bootlicking piece of shit Edited May 24, 2019 by f7ben 1 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ManOnManOral Posted May 24, 2019 Share Posted May 24, 2019 1 hour ago, f7ben said: "Many lawyers appealing to many judges and all serving those with nefarious interests can twist legalese into making it seem as though our rights arent so clear cut" Woolie - 5/24/19 Fucking bootlicking piece of shit Boots are not all he licks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DriftBusta Posted May 25, 2019 Share Posted May 25, 2019 I rest my case.^^^^^^^^ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.