• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Secrets (1 Viewer)

Craig234

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 22, 2019
Messages
50,215
Reaction score
24,715
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.
 
Much of what is official and legal (like the annual federal “budget” bills) are basically indecipherable legalese, full of ‘loopholes’ and vague language allowing the underlying executive departments, agencies and programs to do pretty much anything with ‘their’ money, such that many billions remain impossible to track even by official auditors. Of course, that‘s even worse for many ‘TLA’ entities which perform classified activities.
 
Much of what is official and legal (like the annual federal “budget” bills) are basically indecipherable legalese, full of ‘loopholes’ and vague language allowing the underlying executive departments, agencies and programs to do pretty much anything with ‘their’ money, such that many billions remain impossible to track even by official auditors. Of course, that‘s even worse for many ‘TLA’ entities which perform classified activities.
This is true of the government and also true of private individuals and corporations. Many billions are one with the snows of yesteryear.
 
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.
"whistleblowing" isn't actually illegal, and that's pretty much what all those examples are.
 
"whistleblowing" isn't actually illegal, and that's pretty much what all those examples are.
Whistleblowing isn't illegal, and none of those examples are.
 
-snip-
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.

Real easy tell... if you're agreeing with Tucker and or Greenwald but a bi-partisan SSCI report links the guy to GRU and mentions his name 193 X,
you might want to run the other way!



51521867413_47b18e8fc3_b.jpg


-snip-
It is a bi-partisan report, released in redacted form just thirteen months ago. Assange is mentioned 193 times. Broaden your knowledge base, read it. Tucker Carlson performs similarly to an FSB or a GRU stooge. Why?

Caution: large .pdf file:
https://www.intelligence.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/report_volume5.pdf
51521867413_47b18e8fc3_b.jpg


On another thread, posted in October, 2021. -

Who still thinks trump is an asset for the GOP?

"...Jeff Sessions lied under oath during his Senate confirmation hearing about his person to person contacts with Kislyak during the campaign, never honestly disclosing the nature of those contacts. Kislyak's communications were constantly monitored by U.S. counter intelligence. His only secure interactions were person to person at events such as the Cleveland G.O.P. convention where he met with Trump campaign advisor Sessions. Kushner and Flynn established their desire for secure communications with Putin's government. Trump cemented this arrangement of co-conspirators during his presidency, insisting on meeting alone with Putin on multiple occasions, avoiding any official record keeping ,,,succeeding office holders like Biden, put at a disadvantage in preparing to meet with Putin earlier this year because only Putin knew what he discussed in the past with Trump. I have not even covered the FSB agent, Kilimnik, indicted by Mueller who was the business partner of two Trump campaign officials (Sam Patten) or Don Jr.'s personal contacts with Russian agent and RT media asset, Julian Assange, who advised Trump in a tweet, not to concede the 2016 election, if he lost..."
.
 
Last edited:
Real easy tell... if you're agreeing with Tucker and or Greenwald but a bi-partisan SSCI report links the guy to GRU and mentions his name 193 X,you might want to run the other way!.

Sorry, I don't agree. Obviously I'm against the mostly phony right-wing nonsense, I like some things about Greenwald and not others (more like than dislike, just a couple of modern good examples are his work with Snowden and his expose of the corruption of the right-wing regime in Brazil), but none of that changes the story.

I don't even have to totally agree with Assange, that's not the issue, and more than if someone prevented a trump voter from voting I'm against them because I'm for the right to vote.

Assange is an ideologue who sees modern governments as dangerous, because massive organizations with secrecy tend to launch schemes in that secrecy, feeling comfortable to operate in it that they won't be caught. He thinks one of the few things citizens who feel threatened by such powerful organizations with secrecy can do is to remove their feeling of security in their secrecy, by showing them what they do might get exposed.

That seems like it. And a lot of what he'd done seems to have done good. You don't want unconditionally support violating secrecy, but he doesn't seem to have done that, quite. It'd be easy to condemn if he had leaked especially harmful information - a list of American 'secret agents' that got them killed - but I don't see that, just lots of words, false allegations about it.

Rather, it seems like huge state abuse over 'embarrassment'. He got a lot more famous for leaking video of a US helicopter shooting a small group including journalists, mistaking a camera for a missile launcher, killing some. It included the audio showing a rather casual attitude about it by the pilots. Shocking. A valuable leak about the situation and the truth.

He's an Australian who publishes leaks. His doing so seems to not only infuriate security organizations, but they seem to see a way to use persecution and prosecution of him as a way to get their foot in the door to prosecuting investigative journalists for any media that publish leaks.

Remember when Ellsberg couldn't find anyone in government to reveal the Pentagon Papers, he went to the media, and the government ordered the media not to publish them, resulting in a war between the government and newspapers, countless who joined in, followed by a Supreme Court order allowing the publication when we had a Supreme Court that wasn't corrupt.

Hillary made an enemy of Assange when she called for his being killed IIRC. Of course Russian intelligence would look for how they could use Assange for their benefit, just as they used US social media companies for their benefit. So they apparently used a phony middleman to leak Hillary's e-mails to Assange who published them.

What we do know is that the government did great abuse of power to persecute Assange, trying various plots, considering assassination, finally doing a scheme to use the Swedish government to misuse its law enforcement over an incident between Assange and a girlfriend where he removed his condom without her consent.

That launched a deceitful plan to 'get their hands on him', where once in custody the US would extradite him for trial for life imprisonment in the US. So Assange didn't go back to Sweden to go into custody, and was the target of a smear camapign.

He offered to meet outside Sweden for any investigation. He offered to go to Sweden for trial on one condition, that Sweden agreed not to extradite him - they refused because it was nothing but a pretense to extradite him.

It went on for years, after all the legal allowances for investigation had ended, the woman saying she did not want him prosecuted. It kept up, then the British government agreed to seize him, and he went to the embassy of a country who would protect him for years. Then that government changed and they released him to Britain.

Then he's been mistreated for years in a maximum security British prison awaiting extradition. The government has repeatedly lied about his activities, changing charges. It's a massive oppression and crime by our government.
 
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.
We will see how this works when the leaks are coming out of the democrat governing members and are actually addressed. Hunter Biden as son of the President possibly using his fathers connections to make himself and the family rich, nothing being done. Adam schiff lying about the evidence he claims to have seen, Congressman Eric Swalwell being involved with a know Chinese spy. These are but a few that the media ignores, the democrats turn a deaf ear too and the democrat supporters think are lies.
 
We will see how this works when the leaks are coming out of the democrat governing members and are actually addressed. Hunter Biden as son of the President possibly using his fathers connections to make himself and the family rich, nothing being done. Adam schiff lying about the evidence he claims to have seen, Congressman Eric Swalwell being involved with a know Chinese spy. These are but a few that the media ignores, the democrats turn a deaf ear too and the democrat supporters think are lies.
LOL! Yeah, well.... the shit you work yourself up about.... how much of it is single sourced from Rudy, Bannon, and their mutual lawyer, Robert Costello?

Jared Kushner's 'Art of the Deal'

The Hill|7 hours ago
The next year, with a staggering $1.2 billion mortgage coming due on a Kushner-owned Manhattan skyscraper (with the unfortunate address: 666 5 th Avenue), a white knight in the form of Canadian ...

https://www.rawstory.com › allen-weisselberg-michael-cohen-manhattan

Allen Weisselberg drubbed in Manhattan DA filing after trying to

to scapegoat Michael Cohen for his indictment

May 23, 2022 ...prosecutors go through the claims made by Trump Org. CFO Allen Weisselberg as a reason to escape any ...

Manhattan DA defends his right to prosecute federal-tax larceny case against Trump Organization, its ex-CFO

Yahoo|2 days ago
In papers released Friday, the Manhattan DA fights the latest attempts by Trump Organization and ex-CFO Allen Weisselberg to get the case tossed.

Trump's legal dance card is so full, lawyers for his New York cases say they're double-booked

Business Insider on MSN.com|2 days ago
So many cases, so little time. Seven of Donald Trump's toughest legal battles have dates, deadlines and depositions in NY this summer.

https://www.citizensforethics.org › reports-investigations › crew-reports › president-trump-legacy-corruption-3700-conflicts-interest

President Trump's legacy of corruption, four years and 3,700 conflicts ...

Jan 15, 2021 Four years and more than 3,700 conflicts of interest later, there is absolutely no doubt that Trump tried at every turn to use the presidency to benefit his bottom line. ...

https://www.npr.org › sections › inauguration-day-live-updates › 2021 › 01 › 20 › 958710562 › trump-revokes-administration-ethics-rules-on-his-way-out-the-door

Trump Revokes Administration Ethics Rules On His Way Out The Door

Jan 20, 2021In one of his final acts in office, in the wee hours of the night, President Trump revoked Executive Order 13770, an order on ethics he signed when he first took office, freeing the way for people ...

House Oversight investigating $2 billion Saudi investment in Jared Kushner's firm

CNBC|16 days ago
WASHINGTON —
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom