all 12 comments

[–]wizzwizz4 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Well researched. Politicians breaking promises without due cause needs to be called out (though preferably before there's an agenda attached to it).

[–]magnora7 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

Like Trump today claiming "I know nothing about wikileaks, that's not my thing." despite plenty of claims of the opposite.

I find the anti-obama posting timing interesting today when Trump is turning a blind eye to assange right this very day.

[–]PikonParadox 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

There is no way that the PRESIDENT OF USA could not know about someone/something that "betrayed" their country/Govt. Why would he say he does not know anything about it?

[–]magnora7 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Because he wants to wash his hands clean of the situation, despite obviously being somewhat involved as is every major world leader. This is a situation about journalistic freedom and he's turning a blind eye because it's politically convenient, it seems.

[–]PikonParadox 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I think it is also possible that he is afraid of going there since almost entire world is defending Assange. Obviously it is not a good idea for him to speak against people's interests. At the same time Trump decided not to report the number of deaths that come from drone attacks "outside war zone". Imagine what you could do with this kind of power.


Like the Govt said, if you are doing nothing wrong, you should not worry about "breach of privacy/information". I think the downsides and risks of this decision are higher than the benefits of it.

[–]wizzwizz4 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

if you are doing nothing wrong, you should not worry about "breach of privacy/information"

Breach of professional privacy / information. The argument doesn't apply to personal.

[–]PikonParadox 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I agree. I'm simply pointing out that the Govt does not follow the very logic used to monitor us. Like the other post said "Govt information should be public and personal info private".

In the end it is supposed to be "of the people, for the people, by the people", not "of the president, for the president, by the president"

[–]PikonParadox 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Does anyone know the legitimate cause for this?

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (3 children)

Regulatory capture?

[–]PikonParadox 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What was the official (given to public) reason for assigning this person there?

[–]magnora7 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

"Who knows better how to regulate than someone from industry?" is a common refrain when hiring these industry people. But really it's just because they've got the money and connections.

[–]JasonCarswell 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

Hope O'Change