They seem to be confusing themselves. Their positions seem to be (1) Having sex with a sleeping woman isn’t rape, (2) he’s being railroaded with fake rape charges because of Wikileaks, and (3) Wikileaks was journalism, not espionage, and he should be given a medal. It never seems to dawn on them that they can take just one of those positions without the other two, or two without the third.
I don’t know if Assange is being railroaded with the rape charges. If he did what they say he did ... it sounds like rape. There are specific situations where I believe consent can be presumed unless specifically withdrawn — like in marriage — so that a wake-up call for a sleeping woman wouldn’t be rape. But, this doesn’t sound like one of those situations. She was, essentially, a complete stranger. Consent can’t be assumed with a complete stranger.
I don’t know if he’s being railroaded. Its possible, though not probable. Maybe the chicks were paid off and are lying, or set him up. Maybe he habitually wakes-up his one-night-stands with condomless surprise sex ... which would be assault. Wouldn’t feel all that sorry for him if he were being railroaded — he got a lot of people killed.
Espionage is a crime. It has been for a long time, and these laws weren’t written because of Assange. The pertinent part of the Espionage Act of 1917 is makes criminal the conveyance of classified information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies.
I don’t see any reasonable argument that this isn’t exactly what Assange did. Even if he is completely innocent of the rape charges — he should go to prison for the rest of his life.
SnakeDoc
“The pertinent part of the Espionage Act of 1917 is makes criminal the conveyance of classified information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies.”
Assange can argue that he had no intention to either “interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies” and claim that he was merely engaging in journalism with juicy information obtained from an outside source. Now I have no problem with throwing the book at that outside source, namely the vile little degenerate Bradley Manning. Assange (sleazy playboy-wannabe that he is) merely does what the MSM is either too lazy or afraid of stepping on toes to do. As for the rape charges, I still standy by the honey trap theory. Just seems to convenient.