Huckabee wants Assange executed

[MilitaryArms]

As if we needed one more reason to dismiss Huckabee as anything but a moving mouth and no brain. Assange and the other journalists aren't guilty of espionage. They didn't steal the documents, they just published them. Maybe someone should execute Mr. Huckabee for releasing a serial rapist loose on the public. He did far more harm in that.

The "journalist" knew full well those documents were classified. He knew they would put our nation at risk, the men and women that serve this nation and the men and women of foreign governments that are our allies at risk. That's the very definition of treason.

I don't believe he's being accused of being a spy. Spying and treason aren't synonymous.

 

[mrjarrell]

Not if by execution and "penalty" he means tried, convicted and then executed.

Do you have any reason to believe he doesn't want a trial to be conducted?

I'm for the death penalty of traitors too. If convicted, I say hang him from the closest tree, or give him a firing squad - his choice.

So, can you explain to us how an Australian citizen is guilty of treason?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Assange is a P.O.S. but I think blame has been diverted from Manning to him. Assange is not responsible for the leak, and he didn't have any obligation to the U.S. Government that I'm aware of to

Assange is not more obligated to the US government (whatever that means) than bin Laden, but he fals into the same category. They are both a clear and present danger to the United States. If Assange doesn't want to be executed he should show up at teh nearest US Embassy and submit himself to the protections of the US legal system. If he's an innocent journalist as is the Libtard mentality he'll be found guilt. If as the rest of us believe he is engaged in espionage he won't. His choice. Launch the drones.

So, can you explain to us how an Australian citizen is guilty of treason?

Not treason. Espionage.

 

[mrjarrell]

The "journalist" knew full well those documents were classified. He knew they would put our nation at risk, the men and women that serve this nation and the men and women of foreign governments that are our allies at risk. That's the very definition of treason.

I don't believe he's being accused of being a spy. Spying and treason aren't synonymous.

I don't think you are aware of what that word actually means. Maybe it just sounds nice to you. He's not guilty of treason in any way, shape or form. He's have to be an American and he's not. Even if he, (and the journalists at all the other newspapers and media outlets around the world) were guilty of some crime it certainly wouldn't be treason.

 

[mrjarrell]

Not treason. Espionage.

So far, US based legal scholars that have commented on this case all disagree with you and have stated that the Espionage act just wouldn't cover him. Just as it didn't cover the journalist who published the Pentagon Papers. We've been down this road before and the precedent has been set. Mr. Assange and all the other journalists are not guilty of espionage, no matter how loudly you scream it.

 

[machete]

Assange is not more obligated to the US government (whatever that means) than bin Laden, but he fals into the same category. They are both a clear and present danger to the United States. If Assange doesn't want to be executed he should show up at teh nearest US Embassy and submit himself to the protections of the US legal system. If he's an innocent journalist as is the Libtard mentality he'll be found guilt. If as the rest of us believe he is engaged in espionage he won't. His choice. Launch the drones.



Not treason. Espionage.

Was this a joke????

Nothing Assange does,,,makes me any less safer here in the US of A...

So,,,some overpaid career government employees got embarrassed for being rude in emails,,,fine by me... Dont talk about leaders in other contries like that...

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

So far, some US based legal scholars that have commented on this case [strike]all[/strike] disagree with you and have stated that the Espionage act just wouldn't cover him. Just as it didn't cover the journalist who published the Pentagon Papers. We've been down this road before and the precedent has been set. Mr. Assange and all the other journalists are not guilty of espionage, no matter how loudly you scream it.

FTFY

I didn't realize I was screaming. I'll use my quite voice.

The fact that academics and debate clubs are engaged in rhetorical contemplation doesn't impress me. Either group rarely acts except when prominent members are appointed to blu ribbon Presidential commissions.

Calling Assange a journalist is Libtarded. Making him out to be a hero is Libtarded. He has engaged in espionage to amass a large cache of classified information in an attempt to harm the United States of America and the people thereof. He is a danger to this nation and should be treated as such. It's reported that intelligence services know where he is. I don't know if that's true because I was never a civilian contractor to the State Department or any other agency or department of the US, other than the Men's Department as implied by my screen name.

 

[Yoder]

No matter how many times you use variations of Librard you are still in so far over your head it is comical, just like all the rest of your ilk calling for Assange to be killed.

But just for fun: what law makes Wikileak's disclosure espionage?

 

[mrjarrell]

Apparently, you have no idea how Wikileaks works. They don't seek out info. There's a link on their front page to submit info, they don't need to engage in espionage. Someone else stole this info and just forwarded it to them. That doesn't constitute espionage. Just as it didn't with Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, (which you and yours conveniently keep ignoring). The only charge that might be able to stick to Wikileaks (the organisation, not Assange, since that's who received it) is receipt of stolen property and I doubt a judge in this country would bother. And you can stop with the "libtard" crap. It was old when Limbaugh used it. Time to put your insults away and grow up.

 

[RichardR]

A predator drone should have already taken care of this problem IMHO.

 

[Expat]

If it was decided that he needed to be eliminated then he should just quietly disappear with all of us wondering where he was hiding.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

No matter how many times you use variations of Librard you are still in so far over your head it is comical, just like all the rest of your ilk calling for Assange to be killed.

But just for fun: what law makes Wikileak's disclosure espionage?

18 U.S.C. § 793

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Apparently, you have no idea how Wikileaks works. They don't seek out info. There's a link on their front page to submit info, they don't need to engage in espionage. Someone else stole this info and just forwarded it to them. That doesn't constitute espionage. Just as it didn't with Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers, (which you and yours conveniently keep ignoring). The only charge that might be able to stick to Wikileaks (the organisation, not Assange, since that's who received it) is receipt of stolen property and I doubt a judge in this country would bother. And you can stop with the "libtard" crap. It was old when Limbaugh used it. Time to put your insults away and grow up.

Apparently you have no idea that that the method by which secrets of the United States of America are received and further transmitted is irrelevent to 18 U.S.C. § 793. In other wrods how you think Wikileaks received the information (which I am unaware has been determined) is irrelevent.

 

[Yoder]

A predator drone should have already taken care of this problem IMHO.

A predator drone can't the care of this problem unless you mean specifically Assange himself, which wouldn't unpublished the document nor prevent any others from being published.

 

[Yoder]

18 U.S.C. § 793

No.

 

[Ogre]

18 U.S.C. § 793

So how does US law have any baring on a non US citizen outside the country?
Does this mean we can prosecute anyone around the world for breaking our laws in their country, where it may may not have any legal ramifications?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

No.

Unparrelled legal analysis.

So how does US law have any baring on a non US citizen outside the country?
Does this mean we can prosecute anyone around the world for breaking our laws in their country, where it may may not have any legal ramifications?

SCOTUS rulings
Yes

 

[Arthur Dent]

Mike Huckabee: WikiLeaks cable whistleblower ‘should be executed' | Metro.co.uk

Good. A politician that understands the core responsibility of government is the protect the US from all enemies, foreign and domestic. His stock just raised a couple points in my book.

You're all about the Constitution until it's inconvenient?

 

[Arthur Dent]

Meanwhile actual legal minds ponder whiter or not anything he has done is illegal.

Those comfortable knowing they'll never be involved in the matter in any way at all continue to thump their chests.

That's the way of the internet warrior.

 

[mrjarrell]

I'll take the US legal scholars over your interpretation. An organisation was sent the info, not an individual. Assange is just the face of Wikileaks and scholars are pretty sure that the Espionage Act, (which is what Holder has mentioned using to go after him) will not apply. They didn't prosecute Ellsberg for the Pentagon Papers, so I'm pretty sure that Assange gets a pass, too. There was just as much belly aching then by the usual suspects.