Julian Assange was arrested.

For all I know Assange has a difficult personality, but we must not consider his personality in this matter. Assange has shown some very sensible and convincing evidences of worldwide governmental misfitting. The very gist of the matter is that his imprisoning is an act from the same persons he demonstrated to be criminals.

In other words, he is a sheep being pastored by the wolves he struggled to uncover from crypsis.

His arrest was expected. Is there a prepared measure or activities for future trial? How to fight?

Calmstorm:
> I just wish he would've leaked both sides not just one side. There was dirt on trump too, but he kept the stuff on trump all hush-hush.

You are assuming that Assange/Wikileaks had access to dirt on Trump, which to me seems unlikely. If some Russians have something on Trump but don't want it released then why would they give it to Wikileaks? Also, the reason Assange personally preferred for a Republican to win was his expectation that the left and center would resist a Republican, but would not oppose Hillary, making her harder to fight.[1] So even if Wikileaks did withhold information about Trump during the campaign based on Assange's views, if the idea is to fight him as president then why not release it *after* the election? Especially why not release it now that the Trump administration is a direct threat to Assange personally?

> and released only hillary's emails.

They released Podesta's emails and the DNC's emails. I don't recall them releasing Hillary's.

> They both should've had the same treatment. Otherwise, it's just corruption and deceit to help a canididate win.

Wikileaks publishing the DNC/Podesta leaks presumably hurt Hillary, just as the Washington Post publishing the Hollywood Access tape presumably hurt Trump. There is nothing wrong with publishing truthful information that affects a political campaign.

> Which sounds like a form of treason to me.

Assange is not American, so by definition he cannot commit treason against the United States.

> Well, at least Obama had him pardoned before he left. That doesn't exonerate Obama, but it does say he has some sense of what is right.

If he had a sense of what is right, he would have (in addition to doing many, many other things differently) pardoned Manning immediately. In fact, he did not pardon her at all. He commuted her sentence from 35 to 7 years, which is better than doing nothing, but not the same as a pardon.

[1] https://theintercept.imgix.net/wp-uploads/sites/1/2018/02/wl1-1518631166.jpg?auto=compress%2Cformat&q=90&w=1000&h=481

I believe it's very bad when the state persecutes who report the crimes and don't the criminals.

i do not know of any thing wikileaks could leak about trump than what he himself tweets on his twitter account and on the press the attack on juilian assange is a huge injustic and violates the first amendment

From Freedom of the Press Foundation email?

>In a truly shocking development, Trump’s Justice Department has indicted WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange for publishing secret government documents under the Espionage Act of 1917.

The Espionage Act, originally intended for use against spies, has been wielded against as sources of journalists and whistleblowers in recent decades, but never a publisher. No matter your personal feelings about Assange, these new charges against him are unprecedented, terrifying, and strike at the heart of fundamental press freedom rights.

Freedom of the Press Foundation Executive Director Trevor Timm issued the following statement:

"Put simply, these unprecedented charges against Julian Assange and WikiLeaks are the most significant and terrifying threat to the First Amendment in the 21st century. The Trump administration is moving to explicitly criminalize national security journalism, and if this prosecution proceeds, dozens of reporters at the New York Times, Washington Post and elsewhere would also be in danger. The ability of the press to publish facts the government would prefer remain secret is both critical to an informed public and a fundamental right. This decision by the Justice Department is a massive and unprecedented escalation in Trump’s war on journalism, and it’s no exaggeration to say the First Amendment itself is at risk. Anyone who cares about press freedom should immediately and wholeheartedly condemn these charges."

Freedom of the Press Foundation will have much more on this story as it develops.

Want to stop getting these emails? Click here to unsubscribe.