American Politics

[QUOTE=JustTK;2808875]Thanks Tiny. I think this docu is good for those folks that have not really paid attention to the case over the past 10 years and need a summary of the case. JA is getting a lot of attention right now bcos its the 4th anniv of his incarceration. He will be released bcos this again is another great example of the USA Govt doing countless things wrong and another reason for me to be negative about it. The reasons the USA Govt put fwd are shallow and / or false and will have horrific consequences for individual freedom. They will not be allowed to do it. JA will eventually be released, even if they got away w punishing the scapegoat more than enough already.

P.S.: apart from one Vennie giel I know, I just never go for white girls, nor redheads, and certainly not ones w Oz accents.[/QUOTE]I didn't know most of what was in the video, so it was educational to me. This sounds like a First Amendment (freedom of the press) issue. Assange jumped through hoops to redact documents to protect the innocent and the vulnerable. But Wikileaks efforts were hijacked by the Guardian and Cryptome.

He pissed off The Man and so he will pay for it.

I was being silly about the redhead and the accent. You post a lot of videos where the speakers sound British. The woman is obviously Australian.

I wasn't a red head lover either, but La Diabla in the Colombian telenovela, "Sin Senos no Hay Paraiso" changed that.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2809073]I didn't know most of what was in the video, so it was educational to me. This sounds like a First Amendment (freedom of the press) issue.

I was being silly about the redhead and the accent. You post a lot of videos where the speakers sound British. The woman is obviously Australian.
[/QUOTE]I try to watch a range of news and interest sources, some USA, some UK, some my country, some others. Whatever I find that appears to be legit.

About the Freedom of Press and JA. A moral Q for you. Whay do you think it would be justified for a journalist to speak the truth about the lies of a government, yet not justified for anyone else? Why is that even a relevant Q? Surely, it is a moral virtue for anyone to bring the truth forward about the lies of our ruling elites?

[QUOTE=JustTK;2809255]I try to watch a range of news and interest sources, some USA, some UK, some my country, some others. Whatever I find that appears to be legit.

About the Freedom of Press and JA. A moral Q for you. Whay do you think it would be justified for a journalist to speak the truth about the lies of a government, yet not justified for anyone else? Why is that even a relevant Q? Surely, it is a moral virtue for anyone to bring the truth forward about the lies of our ruling elites?[/QUOTE]My impression is that Assange was a journalist. I haven't thought about this before and don't have a good answer. I don't think it's a huge issue in the USA, as freedom of speech is better protected than most countries. Better than the UK anyway. But yeah, if the CIA or an overly aggressive prosecutor got hold of Assange, they'd probably make mincemeat out of him.

I can imagine instances where it wouldn't be justified for people to leak certain information, for example a list of Afghanis still in Afghanistan who helped the USA Government. As a semi-libertarian, I'm not a fan of government in general, and I don't believe in incarcerating people unless they really deserve it. So effectively if I were dictator of the United States of America, what I'd do about leaks would probably be reasonably similar to what you'd do.

Sorry, I don't have a good answer for this one.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2809406]My impression is that Assange was a journalist. I haven't thought about this before and don't have a good answer.

I can imagine instances where it wouldn't be justified for people to leak certain information,...

[/QUOTE]How about our leaders recognise that there is an important disticntion between the need for ongoing confidentiality, and the act of lying. We can respect confidentiality, but lying needs to be stamped out.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2809528]How about our leaders recognise that there is an important disticntion between the need for ongoing confidentiality, and the act of lying. We can respect confidentiality, but lying needs to be stamped out.[/QUOTE]I definitely don't trust our leaders with determining what's the truth and what's a lie. And I don't entirely trust judges and jurors to do that either. Lying doesn't necessarily deserve legal punishment. But, if in the course of lying people, say, commit fraud, that's another matter.

In the USA, sometimes prosecutors try to put people in jail for lying, even when they commit no other crime. Bill Clinton ("I did not have sex with that woman"), Martha Stewart and Michael Flynn are examples. That just shouldn't happen.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2809255]

About the Freedom of Press and JA. A moral Q for you. [/QUOTE]"There can be no higher law in journalism than to tell the truth and to shame the devil. " - Thomas Jefferson.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2809617]I definitely don't trust our leaders with determining what's the truth and what's a lie. And I don't entirely trust judges and jurors to do that either. Lying doesn't necessarily deserve legal punishment. But, if in the course of lying people, say, commit fraud, that's another matter.

In the USA, sometimes prosecutors try to put people in jail for lying, even when they commit no other crime. Bill Clinton ("I did not have sex with that woman"), Martha Stewart and Michael Flynn are examples. That just shouldn't happen.[/QUOTE]How would one address lying in court if perjury is not available as crime? Disputes can never be resolved without disincentivizing this type of behavior.

Perjury -the offense of willfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oath

Also:

18 US CODE 1001.

Section 1001's statutory terms are violated if someone:

"falsifies, conceals or covers up by any trick, scheme or device a material fact.

"makes any false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations.

"makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry".

And, for cases arising after the 1996 amendments, the item at issue was material.

Whether the above acts are criminal depends on whether there is an affirmative response to each of the following questions:

Was the act or statement material?

Was the act within the jurisdiction of a department or agency of the United States? And.

Was the act done knowingly and willfully?

Clinton didn't go to jail or even tried because the quote was at a press conference, and not to officials nor court; was impeached for it.

Martha Stewart. Guilty of four counts of obstruction of justice and lying to investigators; insider trading was dropped. She had her day in court lost, appealed and lost there too.

Flynn pleaded guilty to one felony count of "willfully and knowingly making materially false statements and omissions to the Federal Bureau of Investigation" about conversations with the Russian ambassador to the United States, Sergey Kislyak, ".

Amazing that the truth is seeping out yet the silence is deafening:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XccISIi-yo[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2810923]Amazing that the truth is seeping out yet the silence is deafening:

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XccISIi-yo[/URL][/QUOTE]Strange but youtube is not a reliable source, nor are blogs, conspiracy websites or basically any social media source. The truth is one way or another the Chinese government are unlikely to reveal sufficient evidence of their activities to make a definitive conclusion so all the rest is speculation.

[QUOTE=GDreams;2810962]Strange but youtube is not a reliable source. The truth is one way or another the Chinese government are unlikely to reveal sufficient evidence of their activities to make a definitive conclusion so all the rest is speculation.[/QUOTE]Its not YT that one should trust or distrust, it is the content provider. John Campbell has proven to be a remarkable source of info over the past 3 years. Most US state departments (those that have taken the time to look) are now distancing themselves from the animal origin hypothesis, despite trying desperately to prove it for the past 3 years. That in itself is strong evidence. I think the US has enough paperwork and other documenation to conclude the lab leak theory without the need to seek info rom China. Bcos USA was working w China on the virus when it was leaked. USA and China caused the pandemic that killed millions.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811201]Most US state departments (those that have taken the time to look) are now distancing themselves from the animal origin hypothesis, despite trying desperately to prove it for the past 3 years. That in itself is strong evidence. I think the US has enough paperwork and other documenation to conclude the lab leak theory without the need to seek info rom China.[/QUOTE]Uh huh. Common knowledge. In Congress right now.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KYmBAWtjoQw[/URL]

Quite incredible what the Dems are doing to free speech in the USA.

It is beconing a crime to hold dissenting views from the govt, those that attend conferences and meetings with opposite political parties will be silenced, jailed, raided, murdered. Lies and blind obsequience are now the norm. Ity sounds like the worst tales our of Communist China and the 50's Soviet Union.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEkpvId1VqQ[/URL]

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811201]Its not YT that one should trust or distrust, it is the content provider. John Campbell has proven to be a remarkable source of info over the past 3 years. Most US state departments (those that have taken the time to look) are now distancing themselves from the animal origin hypothesis, despite trying desperately to prove it for the past 3 years. That in itself is strong evidence. I think the US has enough paperwork and other documenation to conclude the lab leak theory without the need to seek info rom China. Bcos USA was working w China on the virus when it was leaked. USA and China caused the pandemic that killed millions.[/QUOTE]So if it originated in a bat cave but none of those earliest cases were noted and reported to the responsible countries by the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents so they would have had the easy 2-3 months heads up required to avert Trump's Pandemic and the millions of deaths, millions of jobs and businesses wiped out, worldwide economic and supply-chain collapse, the resulting lingering inflation, etc in the first place because Trump defunded and removed the agents whose very job it was to do exactly that 5+ months before those first cases emerged against all expert warnings for him not to do something so stupid and dangerous, how is that materially different in terms of the historic damage Trump's Pandemic has wrought if it turns out those early cases were instead caused by a lab leak, which would likely have been noted and reported by those agents Trump removed even faster?

Trump's Pandemic resulting from unreported early cases originating from a lab leak Good but originating from unreported early cases originating from a bat cave Bad?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2811329]So if it originated in a bat cave but none of those earliest cases were noted and reported to the responsible countries by the Pandemic Prevention and Response agents so they would have had the easy 2-3 months heads up required to avert Trump's Pandemic ...

Trump's Pandemic resulting from unreported early cases originating from a lab leak Good but originating from unreported early cases originating from a bat cave Bad?[/QUOTE]I didn't say anything about Trump. He is your obsession, not mine. I would say it is much fairer to say this is Fauci's pandemic, not Trump's. USA has been funding GoF research in China for many years prior to Trump. USA and China governments caused these millions of deaths, hence the huge cover up til mow.

What is good and bad. To know the truth is good, to lie is bad. That way we can learn and prevent it from happening again, rather than dooming oursleves to a cycle of identical errors.

[QUOTE=JustTK;2811280]Quite incredible what the Dems are doing to free speech in the USA.

It is beconing a crime to hold dissenting views from the govt, those that attend conferences and meetings with opposite political parties will be silenced, jailed, raided, murdered. Lies and blind obsequience are now the norm. Ity sounds like the worst tales our of Communist China and the 50's Soviet Union.

[URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEkpvId1VqQ[/URL][/QUOTE]So when Rhonda Santis appoints a new "board" to place rules on Floriduh's largest employer because the employer publicly disagreed with Rhonda's policies, that's OK? When did Rhonda become a Dem?