You are not reading my posts. I never said the US charged Assange with sexual assault.
He was charged by the US with violating the Espionage Act by releasing unredacted classified documents and the US was trying to extradite him and bring him to trial. He took a plea deal, as I stated earlier.
It is funny how the SCOTUS leak investigation was unsuccessful. Common sense says that a third party should investigate the leak, but SCOTUS did not want an outsider conducting the investigation and their internal investigation proceeded. As we know, SCOTUS has no oversight.
Again, Daleiden’s recording of interactions with Planned Parenthood were an illegal act. The California AG conducted a search of his residence as part of the investigation into his illegal recording of Planned Parenthood interactions. There was no SWAT team sent to his house.
The Access Hollywood tape was made in LA I think. Trump was wearing a microphone, which is consent to being recorded, so no laws broken there!
Assange was charged and sentenced for publishing “secret” documents.
Was the SCOTUS ruling less than “secret” - that the publishers would not be charged for publishing it? Both Assange and the newspapers who reported the SCOTUS leak got their information from sources who disclosed it illegally. And you are STILL not acknowledging the hypocrisy, or “ranting” about it. It almost seems like you’re OK with “One rule for thee, another for me” when the Deep State does it.
No SWAT team? What do you call 11 men with rifles and a canine showing up at your door and ransacking the place for 4 hours? https://www.dailywire.com/news/hurricane-kamala-activist-remembers-harrowing-raid-ordered-by-harris-over-planned-parenthood-videos . See, you make these comments so matter-of-factly but they are deceptive. I suppose you’ll say it wasn’t technically a SWAT team, but arguing about semantics when there’s a much bigger picture being hidden is not good.
At https://www.shouselaw.com/ca/blog/criminal-defense/is-it-illegal-to-record-someone-without-consent-in-california/ it explains the exception which allows an average citizen to record a conversation in which they are a participant, even without the other person’s consent:
>>>>>
“You as a private citizen can get around the law against eavesdropping if you record a conversation in order to gather evidence about certain kinds of crimes. This exception applies if:
you are one of the parties to the conversation that you are recording, and
you are recording the conversation in order to gather evidence that you reasonably believe is related to the other party committing:
extortion,
kidnapping,
bribery, or
any felony involving violence against another person (such as murder or rape)”
>>>>
Daleiden was a participant in the conversations and I would say that planning to literally butcher fully-born children is a “felony involving violence against another person”. So Daleiden’s recording was NOT against the law and was thus able to be used in prosecuting Planned Parenthood.
At https://www.11alive.com/article/news/politics/elections/loeffler-access-hollywood/85-0461b9c5-93a0-427c-b1a0-dc7939348ff1 it says, “The Access Hollywood tape, made in 2005, emerged in October 2016 while Trump was wearing a microphone. A camera rolled out of his eyeshot and recorded”
The recording was not from Trump’s mic which was for the interview he was going to have later with Bush; it was from a camera that Trump did not know was recording. Apparently Bush didn’t know it was recording either, or he wouldn’t have made sexist comments at the same time. According to the above link,
“California criminal law says that a conversation is confidential when it takes place in circumstances that reasonably indicate that at least one party to the conversation intends for no one else to overhear it. “
It sounds to me like BOTH parties in the conversation intended for no one else to overhear it.
IOW, the recording was made illegally, since neither party to the conversation was aware that taping was in progress.
So from that link, it seems that Daleiden’s recording was lawful; Access Hollywood’s was not. And yet Kamala’s office treated Daleiden like a felon and refused to use the tapes to prosecute Planned Parenthood as the law allows. And New York judges allowed the illegally-recorded “Access Hollywood” tape to be used in the E Jean Carrol court case.
Does it bother you that the laws were applied BACKWARDS, and in both cases to benefit the leftist government cabal?