Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

snot

(10,928 posts)
13. I was around DU in those old days;
Fri Jan 10, 2025, 03:25 PM
Jan 10

and funny, I never saw any actual evidence that those journalists were "frauds."

There were, e.g., attempts by TPTB, which universally feared exposure of their own corruption and mistakes, to discredit Assange; but all of their smears were in turn discredited. The US government's only witness against him, a convicted fraudster who was promised leniency in exchange for testifying against Assange, recanted his allegations and never testified. The US's own indictments ended up alleging nothing more than that Assange published leaked info which the US had classified, but US officials repeatedly admitted in court that they could not name a single instance in which anyone had been seriously harmed as a result of Wikileaks publications; and nothing in the final version of the charges against Assange differed from things that other MSM publishers had done – if Assange broke the Espionage Act, so did the NYT et al.

Please feel free to link to any DU archive files that you believe contain actual evidence that has not been discredited.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Editorials & Other Articles»The Borowitz Report - Dem...»Reply #13