Why are you on this forum?
Why are you posting here when you cant add anything thoughtful about the assange case??
That’s pretty much what I’m asking you
Thats a travesty. You didnt ask me about my thoughts on assange.
Why is that a requirement? Who made that rule? Why is that considered thoughtful. How did you become the person who decides what questions must be answered?
An observation about yourself. Quite a poignant one as a matter of fact
I never required anyone amswer a question. I didn’t decide what topic is more important than another. I didn’t claim anyone needed to have an opinion on anything. There are no rules like that.
That has nothing to do with why you are here
Too many empty one-liners being tossed around. It’s complicated, I don’t care enough about the creep to worry about it one way or the other. Seems to me when it comes to general political sanity and problem solving abilities, we seem to have lost that war already, so his conviction or release, won’t make much difference. As for Assange the person, and his personal conundrum, karma can be a bi_ch.
But since I know only what I’ve read, I’ll let these folks take it from here . . .
What the Justice Department is alleging is that Assange broke the law by encouraging Manning to look for more material to send him, and saying that he could help her to crack a password. The problem is, if convicted on that charge, it could set a wide-ranging precedent for any journalist who deals with sources who bring leaked information — and that could have a chilling effect on American investigative reporting.
It is an awkward position to argue that someone should face trial in one place, but not another. And yet, justice would be served if Assange were to face his accusers in court in Sweden, where he was accused of several counts of sexual assault by two women. The investigation could technically be re-opened until 2020, though the initial investigatory term expired in 2015 and prosecutors said in 2017, short of Assange returning to Sweden, they saw no way to re-open the investigation at that time.
1 Like
Oh, and just a polite reminder, the name of this thread is “Will the Emoluments Clause ever catch up to Mr.trump?”
by Richard Tofel - Dec. 2, 2016 - ProPublica.org
The Emoluments Clause appears in Article I, Section 9 of the Constitution. It bars any “person holding any office of profit or trust under” the United States from accepting any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign state” “without the consent of the Congress.” The word “emolument” comes from the Latin emolumentum, meaning profit or gain. The language of the clause was lifted in its entirety from the Articles of Confederation which established the structure of the government of the United States from 1781 until the ratification of the Constitution in 1788-89. The clause was derived from a Dutch rule dating to 1751.
The clause was added to the draft Constitution at the Constitutional Convention on Aug. 23, 1787 …
The Emoluments Clause bars U.S. officials, including the president, from receiving payments from foreign governments or foreign government entities unless the payments are specifically approved by Congress.
As ProPublica and others have detailed, Trump’s business has ties with foreign government entities ranging from loans and leases with the Bank of China to what appear to be tax-supported hotel deals in India and elsewhere.
The full extent of such ties remains unknown, and Trump has refused to disclose them, or to make public his tax returns, through which many such deals, if they exist, would be revealed.
Foreign government investments in Trump entities would also be covered by the clause, as would foreign government officials paying to stay in Trump hotels, so long as Trump stands to share in the revenues. …
GABE LEZRA Staff Counsel, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington - Oct, 2019
This brings us back to the original sin of this administration—the president’s decision not to divest from the ownership of his businesses. None of these issues, whether it’s the president of Ukraine trying to curry favor with the president in order to buy more missiles, the government of Saudi Arabia funding hundreds of thousands of dollars in spending at his D.C. hotel prior to murdering a U.S. journalist, or the Romanian president patronizing the Trump Hotel in Washington the day before meeting with the president, would have been a problem if he had fully divested from his businesses.
In every prior presidential impeachment proceeding in our country’s history, a central element of the charges was that the president—be it Johnson, Nixon or Clinton—acted in a manner contrary to his position of trust as president. The remedy for egregious violations of the public trust is impeachment. Throughout his tenure in office, President Trump’s conduct has undermined public faith that the government acts only for the good of the American people rather than for his own self-enrichment. This belief in an impartial, neutral government is critical for democracy to function; once the integrity of government institutions comes into question, the faith in the entire government superstructure breaks down.
The Framers were unambiguous in this respect. Impeachment is a proper remedy for egregious violations of the emoluments clauses’ prohibitions on accepting things of value from prohibited sources. …
1 Like
Why do you say creep ? Its not as if he is showering with his 14 year old daughter
Creep!!
Being offered hospitality and refuge, then repaying with wiping your own poop all over their walls.
That’s pretty creepy too. 
Sounds like thats supposed to be a post for another thread/ topic
Goofball, it’s a response to your diversionary segue. 
All that you have left is name calling.
Lenin Moreno is a far right oligarch who sold him self to the neo liberials platform and got upset with assange after wikileaks published the INA papers exposing corruption in his govt and in himself.
To be clear it’s your behavior I labeled. I’m sure in real life you are an angel and joy to be with. Excuse the misunderstanding.
Oh, and to be a clear, a creep is, as creep does. 
