The Constitutional Rubicon of an Assange Prosecution

grarpamp grarpamp at
Tue May 9 14:03:11 PDT 2017

On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 1:14 PM, Razer <g2s at> wrote:
>> So why, in Comey’s mind, is it permissible to bring charges against
>> Assange?  He explained his reasoning as follows..."

"Porn", of essentially all types, in the US at least, excluding
child / murder / non-consent varieties, is legal First Amendment.
Therefore, "intel porn", to date not even resulting in same above, is legal.
In fact, US intel porn has documented the illegal opposite by the actors...
willful "Collateral" Murder, among other murder, rape by govt employee
warfighters while in uniform, complicitous, conspiritous, illegal and
non-consensual actions by government, spying, hacking, theft, etc.
Perhaps US govt can go get fucked raw in film porn, be stupid and catch
disease outed in tabloid porn, and wither and die in the news porn.
All legal ;)


"is simply about releasing classified information to damage the United
States of America."

Two faced... look at US releasing to "damage" other countries,
alter relative positions, foment issues, even lying IQ1 WMD, etc.

"call us before they publish classified information"
"is there anything about this that’s going to... jeopardize government"
"media outlets that work in partnership with the U.S. government
and are willing to self-censor based on official claims... are journalists."
Prior Restraint... just another tool government uses to keep its, and
its favors... power, secrets and control over others. Also secret courts,
And... "FIRE! FIRE! FIRE!"
Panic? Really? Whatever. Instead of foisting P.R., teach effective p2p
emergency situation management techniques to everyone.

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list