• bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    This is pretty heavily slanted in his favor dude. You’re leaving out the part where he picks and chooses what information to release based on his politics, how he had his own state sponsored show in Russia after he fled there, how he never released documents related to the Republican Party, etc. He ran an organization that’s explicit purpose was transparency, not “only being transparent when it fits my politics.“ There are also a lot of questions about how he (mis)handled some of that classified data and potentially put a lot of people in jeopardy.

    US absolutely went overboard in how they went after him. It was shameful. But I think he did some good and some bad and you need to acknowledge a little more of the bad here. People try to make him out to be a saint or a super villain, when the simple reality is he fell somewhere in between at different times. We also can’t overlook the fact that he played a significant role in Trump winning the presidency, which a lot of people are still upset about. (Please people do not write a 10 paragraph essay about how terrible Clinton’s campaign was. That is also true. Two things can be true.)

    • makeasnek@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      18
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      This is pretty heavily slanted in his favor dude. You’re leaving out the part where he picks and chooses what information to release based on his politics,

      As any journalist is entitled to do. Journalists have bias, especially investigative ones, they are allowed to ruthlessly pursue corruption of one party or one organization or whatever. His reporting was factual and led to reforms in the DNC primary system. We have a more democratic primary as a result. I’ve yet to see one source actually verifiably claim he got similar emails on the RNC like he did for DNC. This argument was used by the DNC to deflect from their own corruption.

      how he had his own state sponsored show in Russia after he fled there

      When you are a persecuted journalist, you will talk to whatever shows will air you. As for fleeing to Russia, you’re thinking of Snowden not Assange. Assange was the one who got asylum from Ecuador and then was held in UK prison pending appeal.

      • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        His group existed to be transparent against all powers. He ran the group and suppressed stuff that didn’t agree with his politics. That’s not a transparency-first organization. That’s not speaking truth to power.

        Russia is more complicated than that and you know it dude.

        • makeasnek@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          So, somebody hacked the RNC emails just like they hacked the DNC emails, yet Assange wouldn’t publish them, and apparently nobody else would either? I doubt it. I’m sure Politico would love to run with those. This “he had docs from both sides but only leaked one side which prevented the leaks from getting out” story is nonsense. Any media outlet would have sold their left nut to get a copy of the RNC email server.

          Whether Russia gave him the leaked documents or not doesn’t matter imo. All the DNC had to do was not be corrupt, that was it. If they did that, there would be nothing to leak and no backlash that could impact the election. The DNC tried to bury Bernie, they had a corrupt primary process, Assange exposed that and they lost some votes. Blame the DNC for that, don’t shoot the messenger. I vote in DNC primaries, I’m glad he helped that system be accountable to their primary voters.

          • bolexforsoup@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            16
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            edit-2
            5 months ago

            You’re moving the goalposts.

            I never said the DNC wasn’t corrupt or putting their thumb on the scale against Bernie. I am saying that for the head of a transparency first organization, he was particularly choosy except when it fell in line with his politics.

            When your explicit goal is to expose corruption and malfeasance by governments and politicians you’re supposed to do it across-the-board, not just based on your personal whims and preferences.