- Joined
- Apr 22, 2019
- Messages
- 34,043
- Reaction score
- 15,420
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Take a moment and realize how much of the function around our government is 'unofficial' and 'illegal', but how much we rely on the unofficial and illegal.
I can't really do this justice off the top of my head, but consider just a couple examples.
If the rules were followed, we would not have the leak of the Supreme Court's coming ruling on Roe, allowing the public to be warned and to discuss and react, and the other branches to better consider their option to write a law to nullify the ruling.
If the rules were followed, we would not have the leaks of many recorded phone calls with the top Republican in the House, Kevin McCarthy, showing how badly he's lied between what he said privately after 1/6 and what he said publicly.
If the rules were followed, we wouldn't have the updates yet on much of the trump coup plot.
While it's not illegal because it's against another country, similar hacking and spying and leaking allowed all kinds of things on Ukraine, like Putin's plans and the lies he planned, and intercepted phone calls from Russian soldiers, as well as exposing lying by China.
People are not used to saying, "I support the leaking of confidential information". Yet the public heavily relies on just that for important information, and it the president and top members of Congress use it for their own purposes. We'd be pretty crippled trying to have any accountability for government without the unofficial and illegal. It's a standard part of our journalism. No one seems to be trying fix the system so it isn't needed.
The life of one man, Julian Assange, who exposed truths embarrassing to the US about its killing and other matters - essentially the same thing as exposing Russian lies about its massacres in Ukraine, but smaller stories - is being destroyed for doing the same thing other journalists do, while we all rely on it.
It's something to think about what a mess the system is, and how badly it would be broken without the leaking.
I can't really do this justice off the top of my head, but consider just a couple examples.
If the rules were followed, we would not have the leak of the Supreme Court's coming ruling on Roe, allowing the public to be warned and to discuss and react, and the other branches to better consider their option to write a law to nullify the ruling.
If the rules were followed, we would not have the leaks of many recorded phone calls with the top Republican in the House, Kevin McCarthy, showing how badly he's lied between what he said privately after 1/6 and what he said publicly.
If the rules were followed, we wouldn't have the updates yet on much of the trump coup plot.
While it's not illegal because it's against another country, similar hacking and spying and leaking allowed all kinds of things on Ukraine, like Putin's plans and the lies he planned, and intercepted phone calls from Russian soldiers, as well as exposing lying by China.
People are not used to saying, "I support the leaking of confidential information". Yet the public heavily relies on just that for important information, and it the president and top members of Congress use it for their own purposes. We'd be pretty crippled trying to have any accountability for government without the unofficial and illegal. It's a standard part of our journalism. No one seems to be trying fix the system so it isn't needed.
The life of one man, Julian Assange, who exposed truths embarrassing to the US about its killing and other matters - essentially the same thing as exposing Russian lies about its massacres in Ukraine, but smaller stories - is being destroyed for doing the same thing other journalists do, while we all rely on it.
It's something to think about what a mess the system is, and how badly it would be broken without the leaking.