Huma Talks. Nobody Walks.

[Flanders]

If you heard it then your previous comment makes no sense.

To Glasnost: Like you, Assenge fails to make the distinction between FBI investigators, and the institution called the FBI as I try to do:

To Glasnost: If I am interpreting events correctly, I believe the NYPD was on the same page as FBI investigators when they stood up to the DoJ (Loretta Lynch).

Assange starts out by connecting the FBI to political persecution. Beyond that, you will have to explain what you heard.

Parenthetically, Assange’s opening political persecution remark is right out of the Left’s play book on the US military. Let one US soldier commit a crime and the entire US military is evil —— portray FBI investigators as Gestapo and KGB agents regardless of what they do. Assange’s entire interview amounted to nothing more than justification for his political strategy.

Finally, you can bet that Assange and his people at Wikileaks are not happy that FBI investigators might come up smelling like Roses when the Clinton Saga ends.

p.s. See this thread for my comments on the FBI when J. Edgar Hoover was running the outfit:

There Go Da Judge

 

[GLASNOST]

...... Assange’s opening political persecution remark is
... right out of the Left’s play book on the US military.

Let one US soldier commit a crime and the entire US military is evil ——

... portray FBI investigators as Gestapo and KGB agents regardless of what they do. .....

You are doing EXACTLY what you've just accused Assange of doing.

 

[Flanders]

You are doing EXACTLY what you've just accused Assange of doing.

To Glasnost: Assange actually called the FBI the “political police”. I wrote “persecution” in order to identify his political posture.

I am one man posting on a message board. I post my critiques, opinions, interpretations, and predictions the same way everybody else does. Even those wimps who straddle the fence and smugly dictate the qualifications for fair express an opinion of sorts. I, on the other hand, do not intend to post messages in order to please my opposites.

Regarding your accusation: I have no police powers. My only institutional power comes from freedom of speech, and only when the government lets me exercise it.

In the same vain, Wikileaks enjoys freedom of the press —— a PRIVILEGE I do not have. Note in Assanges interview he repeated uses the word “publish” a clear reference to freedom of the press. The following excerpt represents some thoughts on freedom of the press:

There is no way in hell Democrats will limit a ‘free press’ they control. Indeed, Democrats and press barons are equally contemptuous of free speech on the Internet.

Incidentally, if Democrats want to alter the First Amendment I suggest eliminating these four words ——“or of the press” —— so it reads:

First Amendment
​

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.​

Under my suggested change the press would still enjoy freedom of speech like the rest of us. More to the point, the press would have to defend freedom of speech as a matter of self-interest instead of only defending press protection while feeding everybody else to Democrat wolves.​

As I’ve said many times, Democrats had nothing to fear so long as freedom of speech was limited to soapbox orators and barroom pundits. Freedom of speech on the Internet is exposing Democrat ideology to more Americans than Democrats can live with. That’s a new fear for Democrats; hence, they are reacting like cornered rats.​

Constitutional Sneaks