Leave aside whatever views you have of MTG. Just put them in a corner for a second. OK, have we done that?
— Glenn Greenwald (@ggreenwald) June 18, 2022
Now: think about the indisputable fact that not AOC, Bernie or a single Squad member could or would say most of what is in this thread, let alone in this tone, and ask why: https://t.co/ZuekWvA3Fw
June 18, 2022
Glenn Greenwald asks why Marjorie Taylor Greene is saying this and AOC, Bernie, and their ilk are not.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
56 comments:
The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation.
If Truth outs a corrupt democrat - it's illegal truth.
"The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation."
Your comment is unclear. Who, in your opinion, is spreading disinformation? Assange or the USA?
The Left/democraticals/NeverTrump-neocon- FakeCons are absolutely silent on this issue because now that they have captured most instituions of govt, tech and media etc, they seek to gut the Bill of Rights because it impedes their establishment of themselves as earthly secular gods and creating their dystopian Brave New World.
campy: "The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation."
It would be a daunting endeavor to unpack just how wrong and moronic that statement is.
Unless it was offered ironically.
If they are upset over the Khashoggi killing then they should be upset over Julian Assange.
She doesn't understand what Trump did by giving the Saudis a pass on that. He got them to owe him a favor. Biden is too stupid to see that as well.
The amendment was intended to be apolitical. That is no longer operative. Think one-way street. Or Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Hugo Chavez, or Xi Jingpong.
"Leave aside whatever views you have of MTG."
Bwahahahahaha. You are asking the left to do this?
There are a multitude who, just can not listen to the actual words of Trump, Taylor-Green, Cruz and others. If they say, "The sky is blue." we'd hear about everything BUT the sky.
A fundamental value of the left is that principles are invoked only if they help advance the revolution. Consistency is defined as always adhering to this fundamental value. The left believe that persecuting Assange is good because his publication of DNC emails hurt the left.
She is also one of the ONLY Republicans who is standing up for the rights of the DC gulag prisoners.
I trust assange's honesty more than every damn politician we have in washington. Every one. Full stop.
Has enough time passed that Assange can use the Hillary defense, "What difference at this point does it make?" and get off completely free? Or should he go with the "I don't recall" defense? Or wait out the statute of limitations before complying with document subpoenas? Or get a Bergdahl weekend pass to go AWOL and join the enemy without punishment?
I'd recommend the Chewbacca defense, as it makes more sense than any of the above.
Under the anachronistic left-right paradigm, freedom of press is a privilege of the State-approved Fourth Estate.
It is Trump's eternal shame that he didn't pardon Assange before leaving office. More than anything else, I hold that against him now and in the future. I think he should have pardoned Snowden, too. And if the US does manage to extradite Assange, I hope the jury in his case sees through the prosecution and nullifies them.
Blogger campy said...
The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation.
A statement by someone who knows no history. Where do you think the story about Jefferson and Sally Hemmings came from ?
Yet again I had to do a search on another acronym search. This time 'MTG'. This is what I found (by the way, I still don't know what it means):
Acronym Definition
MTG Meeting
MTG Magic: The Gathering
MTG Mortgage
MTG Mounting
MTG Movimento Tradicionalista Gaucho (Portuguese: Gaucho Traditionalist Movement; Brazil)
MTG Matheson Tri-Gas (various locations)
MTG Mail Transfer Gateway
MTG Mid Term Guidelines
MTG Mind the Gap (London underground announcement)
MTG Meta Tag Generator (software)
MTG Methanol To Gasoline
MTG Morpheus Trading Group (Florida)
MTG Machine Tool Group (Belgium)
MTG Manual Tank Gauging
MTG Micro Turbine Generator
MTG Master Timing Generator
MTG Military Tactical Generator
MTG Media Task Group
MTG Main Turbine Generator
MTG More Than Gymnastics (Fort Wayne, Indiana)
MTG Metric Tonne Gross
MTG Modern Times Group Ltd (Chile)
MTG Maintenance Test Group
MTG Many-To-One Traffic Grooming
MTG Midthigh Girth
MTG Manufacturing Technical Group
MTG Manitoba Transit Gallery (Canada)
One thing very strange about the present political situation is how often I'm agreeing with the nutcases. MTG, Boebert, Gaetz, Trump himself. I have no problem saying that these people are off their rocker. So either I'm also insane. Or it takes a crazy person to speak truth to power these days.
"The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation."
I tend to think the Founding Fathers intended free speech as the primary antidote to disinformation.
That's easy. Because Left Fascists are primarily Fascists. Leftism is just the train. Totalitarian fascism is the destination.
It's because Green is an idiot. Assange is in trouble for being an accomplice in the leak of classified information. Not for publishing leaked info that fell into his innocent hands.
"he founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation."
I sincerely doubt 'The Federalist Papers' could even get published by a major publisher today, let alone get posted on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, or Google. If it had not already been a part of us, by today's standards, it would not be a part of us.
"stutefish said...
It's because Green is an idiot. Assange is in trouble for being an accomplice in the leak of classified information. Not for publishing leaked info that fell into his innocent hands"
Where is the source for him being an accomplice? Let's assume he is, unless he did that in the US how does the US government charge a foreigner for something not done in the jurisdiction of the US?
I hope the trial is televised. I want to see the government exposed for the fascists they currently are.
Trump was right not to pardon him, it would have given the Left yet another cudgel to beat him. However come January 2025 if Assange is convicted he may get pardoned.
As usual, Marjorie Taylor Greene is wrong, and Glenn Greenwald is entitled to return to Brazil on the horse he rode in on.
Although the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution makes no distinction between citizens and noncitizens, Supreme Court precedents interpreting the amendment do not always treat these groups the same. Repression of First Amendment freedoms and aliens go hand in hand. Only after being situated lawfully in the United States, can aliens enjoy our First Amendment rights.
Julian Paul Hawkins, aka Julian Assange, was born in Townsville, Queensland, and spent time protected by asylum granted in Ecuador's London embassy after being hunted by Sweden for sexual assault (charges were recently dropped) and the U.S. for 17 counts of espionage as related to Wikileaks. When Ecuador pulled the plug, U.K. authorities arrested Assange and a U.K. court has now granted the release of their prisoner to American authorities.
So Julian is on his way to the United States for trial and incarceration but will not have First Amendment rights when he gets here because he will not have lawful status.
MTG is a Scots Irish lady from the same area that gave us Trump’ s second wife and Zell Miller. You don’t want to start a fight with them. Glen Greenwald has been a fighter all his life too. So he sees her warrior virtue.
The founding fathers never intended for the government to decide what was and was not disinformation.
stutefish said...
It's because Green is an idiot. Assange is in trouble for being an accomplice in the leak of classified information. Not for publishing leaked info that fell into his innocent hands.
*************
Then explain the Pentagon Papers case. Daniel Ellsberg didn't do any time for leaking volumes of classified information.
The ship of state slowly sinks as only approved opinions (approved by the failing and flailing elites) are allowed any currency on major platforms.
I had lunch yesterday with my usual Friday group. One of the members, a very nice guy who is wired into the Chicago/Illinois political and business elite, actually believes that Biden is doing a good job and argues that the only important issues right now involve Donald Trump and "sedition". Is this ignorance? Is this deflection? Did he have Jonestown Kool-Ade as an aperitif?
It really shook me up, because this is a smart guy who believes he is a centrist, but he is getting his ideas from MSNBC. Amazing. On the other hand, he admitted to being shaken up by Caterpillar's move of its HQ to Texas. He didn't understand how they could let Illinois down like that.
Blinders, baby. We all wear 'em from time to time.
Its amazing how Liberal/leftists like Greenwald and Tracey are 10x more passionate and effective in supporting free speech and a reasoned American foreign policy than the Rightwing pundits. Why is the center-right so timid, lazy, and wishy washy?
Steve Schainost post closest thing to spam I've seen at Althouse.
Blogger stutefish said...
It's because Green is an idiot. Assange is in trouble for being an accomplice in the leak of classified information. Not for publishing leaked info that fell into his innocent hands.
The fascists have been heard from. MGT has been hounded and slimed by the left because she disagrees with them. She was even forced to stand trial because judge Amy Totenberg, sister of Nina, permitted it.
A group of far-left Georgia voters had filed a lawsuit to prevent Marjorie Taylor Greene from running for Congress. They claim that Greene violated the 14th Amendment of the Constitution by helping to facilitate the [fake] insurrection.
Lawfare example.
There was a "leak" of confidential IRS tax return data back in 2021. It's hard to see how this could be the result of anything but illegal conduct, either by someone at the IRS who deliberately leaked confidential taxpayer data or an external hacker or someone of that sort. Staff at ProPublica shouldn't be punished for publication as such (the first amendment piece), but if they induced someone to commit a crime or handled stolen goods for the purposes I don't see why the first amendment should protect them from being treated like any other common criminal.
Assange is similar . . . except that he's a subject of a foreign power, not the US, so while I feel contempt for people like Manning or whoever connived at the IRS leak, I mean -- fair's fair. Assange didn't owe the US anything. He's a foreigner.
I had lunch yesterday with my usual Friday group. One of the members, a very nice guy who is wired into the Chicago/Illinois political and business elite, actually believes that Biden is doing a good job and argues that the only important issues right now involve Donald Trump and "sedition". Is this ignorance? Is this deflection? Did he have Jonestown Kool-Ade as an aperitif?"
Amadeus being its Chicago maybe your friend sees what he sees because he is in on the grift. Everything is good when your beak is getting wet.
Gadfly said:
So Julian is on his way to the United States for trial and incarceration but will not have First Amendment rights when he gets here because he will not have lawful status.
******************************
Really? Will he have any other Constitutional rights? 4th amendment? 5th amendment?
14th amendment?
Blogger gadfly said...
As usual, Marjorie Taylor Greene is wrong, and Glenn Greenwald is entitled to return to Brazil on the horse he rode in on.
The fascists sure hate Glenn Greenwald since he started agreeing with us classical liberals.
It's because Assange was a willing tool of Russia and may as well as put the gun to the head of several Belarusian dissidents. AOC and friends don't want to be associated with that. Marj does.
States, and state-fellators, just hate Assange for exposing their corruption and stupidity.
I'll predict right now that he will not survive a transatlantic flight for long . . . assuming they don't send him by rowboat.
Dead man walking.
What is it they say about tragedy? That it's not about the conflict between right and wrong, but about the conflict between right and right? Or maybe it's even about the conflict between wrong and wrong. You do what your conscience dictates, and you break the law. It may cost other people dearly. And there are consequences for that that you have to pay. You can have the satisfaction of thinking or knowing that you were right, but you still have to pay for your actions.
If it can be shown that Assange or Snowden actually did or definitely didn't cost Americans their lives it would tilt the balance towards one side or the other, but there's also the deterrence or preventative aspect to be considered: you don't want to encourage the next, potentially disastrous breach.
Then explain the Pentagon Papers case. Daniel Ellsberg didn't do any time for leaking volumes of classified information.
===========
can Assange seek benefit from stare decisis on this precedent?
will he be provided / have lawyers? [if he ever gets in US court system alive]
Blogger jim said...
It's because Assange was a willing tool of Russia and may as well as put the gun to the head of several Belarusian dissidents. AOC and friends don't want to be associated with that. Marj does.
So the Russians hacked the DNC computers and Hillary's emails. Seth Rich could not be reached for comment. Aren't you tired of these lies ?
Michael K said...
Blogger gadfly said...
As usual, Marjorie Taylor Greene is wrong, and Glenn Greenwald is entitled to return to Brazil on the horse he rode in on.
The fascists sure hate Glenn Greenwald since he started agreeing with us classical liberals.
I have been a dyed-in-the-wool libertarian for at least 25 years but I have never liked the dishonesty of Greenwald as a full-blown progressive or as a panting follower of Trumpism. Glenn is certainly not a classical liberal but he might make it to Trump's version of Naziism.
effinayright said...
Gadfly said:
So Julian is on his way to the United States for trial and incarceration but will not have First Amendment rights when he gets here because he will not have lawful status.
******************************
Really? Will he have any other Constitutional rights? 4th amendment? 5th amendment?
14th amendment?
“The UK courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr Assange. Nor have they found that extradition would be incompatible with his human rights, including his right to a fair trial and to freedom of expression, and that whilst in the US he will be treated appropriately, including in relation to his health.”
As for your questions, your already knew that the Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution apply to aliens residing within the United States. As such, the courts guarantee aliens the right to due process of law and equal protection of the laws.
But exceptions are built in as aliens housed at Guantanamo Bay and other military and CIA prison camps discovered over the past 60 years.
The issue of whether or not Assange was a journalist raised the discussion about his First Amendment Rights that he does not have.
@Michael K., belief in the bullshit lies are all that most of these people have left. Think of jim, Howard, Inga, etc., as the true bitter clingers of our time.
But I would ask people to think back twenty years. The US has Special Forces in Afghanistan and they are closing in on Bin Laden. The New York Times publishes a story describing how the US military is able to track bin Laden’s general whereabouts by geolocating his satellite phone. This despite pleas by government officials that they not release that information until after he’s been captured or killed. So Usama bin Laden hands his phone off to a subordinate and slithers off in a different direction. I would ask jim how many Americans and people of other nationalities died because Usama bin Laden was allowed another 9 years of life? Yet nothing happened to anyone at the Times, did it?
"Your comment is unclear. Who, in your opinion, is spreading disinformation? Assange or the USA?"
That's the problem with this newly discovered *disinformation" exemption to the 1st amendment. It's highly subjective and can be used by powerful forces to silence decent. Assange exposed some "inconvenient" facts which are now labeled disinformation so he can be delt with. To do that, the US government will (ironically enough) have to engage in disinformation. It's looking like bullshit sandwiches all the way down.
"So Julian is on his way to the United States for trial and incarceration but will not have First Amendment rights when he gets here because he will not have lawful status."
Then we need a good and decent President to pardon him for the crime of...committing journalism that never needed correction as it never seemed to be wrong or erroneous.
But we do not have that, because while our current (P)resident certainly tweets far less, he's dramatically less decent of a person.
"Glenn is certainly not a classical liberal but he might make it to Trump's version of Naziism."
I'd hope so, given that "Trump's version of Nazism" is an abject disavowal of Nazism. But, the LP has been a tragi-comic jokes for decades for good and valid reasons and it's biggest proponents are the most valid reasons for it.
Mikie: "So the Russians hacked the DNC computers and Hillary's emails. Seth Rich could not be reached for comment. Aren't you tired of these lies ?"
All that stuff with Assange and leaking US diplomatic cables exposing contacts in Belarus and elsewhere to the kind attentions of their "government" occurred in 2010.
This is not related to the later release of hacked Clinton emails. Odd that you bring that up.
campy said, "The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation."
I don't know what campy's intent was, but I read this comment as sarcasm. Read that way, I think it's brilliant.
The Founding Fathers were certainly aware of "disinformation". The free press in the early years of the Republic was blatantly partisan and steeped in disinformation. All the more reason to encourage "more speech" to counter the less-sanguine realities of "free speech".
The Founding Fathers were certainly aware of "disinformation". The free press in the early years of the Republic was blatantly partisan and steeped in disinformation.
Including, possibly (probably?), the Sally Hemings story.
"Assange is in trouble for being an accomplice in the leak of classified information. Not for publishing leaked info that fell into his innocent hands."
That's what the US is accusing him of in order to justify their intent to prosecute him. It's bullshit.
"Then explain the Pentagon Papers case. Daniel Ellsberg didn't do any time for leaking volumes of classified information."
He was charged and was put on trial, but the judge ultimately dropped all charges due to misconduct by the government, including illegal wiretaps, destruction of documents, and a break-in to the office of Ellsberg's psychiatrist's office to obtain possibly embarrassing files that Nixon and his henchmen hoped would discredit Ellsberg to the public.
"It's because Assange was a willing tool of Russia and may as well as put the gun to the head of several Belarusian dissidents."
How was he a "willing tool of Russia?"
There is no evidence so far that indicate anyone has ever been killed or otherwise suffered consequences due to Wikileaks' disclosures. The truth is that Assange (and other whistle blowers) are persecuted because they embarrass the US by revealing its crimes and lies.
Constitutional protections do apply to non-US citizens tried by the US...unless unlawfully withheld by the US. The entire purpose of imprisoning "Al-Qaeda terrorists" and other "Muslim jihadists" at Gitmo was was try to evade US Constitutional protections afforded those persons. The U.S. Supreme Court squashed that willfully ignorant notion of the Bush/Cheney fascist government. However, there are still prisoners at Gitmo 20 years later who have never been (or ever will be) tried...and possibly never released. (Also, the vast majority of those taken and sent to Gitmo were innocent of any connection to Al Qaeda or any other Muslim terrorist groups.)
So Gadfly says:
"So Julian is on his way to the United States for trial and incarceration but will not have First Amendment rights when he gets here because he will not have lawful status."
I am not a lawyer, the is the other Cliff Krieger, but if Mr Assange does not have lawful status, does the mean he is here wrongly or does it Ean he has no rights under the law, which is sort of like being a slave?
Regards -- Cliff
The founding fathers never intended to let people spread disinformation.
Complete and utter horseshit. Our founding fathers stripped the government of any authority whatsoever to punish or censor people for what they said. Your implicit assertion that the government can be trusted to silence and censor "disinformation" is at odds with 200 fucking years of free speech.
You are dishonest and under your own fucking rule the government can come by and lock you up.
Why this trust that the authorities will always be on your side? What are you, nine?
So Julian is on his way to the United States for trial and incarceration but will not have First Amendment rights when he gets here because he will not have lawful status.
First amendment applies in all criminal trials, regardless of whether the defendant is a citizen or a non-citizen. Period. If the Supreme Court has ever said anything differently, they fucked up.
Assange is in trouble for being an accomplice in the leak of classified information. Not for publishing leaked info that fell into his innocent hands.
Assange is being prosecuted for publishing information that made the U.S. government look bad. Joe Biden calls him a "terrorist." Cause he murdered some -- no wait -- because he blew up a -- no wait -- cause he has a website that makes the U.S. government look bad.
There are some liberals who still believe in free speech. Very old liberals, I might add. The young ones are fascist fuckwits who have been indoctrinated at school and now hate the free speech clause.
Post a Comment