Although in that case it should be the not-disclosing of Chinese/Russian state secrets that you should be angry about.

The case at hand is the disclosure of documents about the U.S., if you're unhappy about that then it's irrelevant if they were being fair or not and if you're happy about it then your comment seems an odd response to the news that Assange is at risk of being punished for aiding in the leaking of those documents.

That could simply come down to insufficient “people on the inside” of those country’s respective governments to act as a source of leaks. China in particular, I would imagine not too many people are willing to (literally) die over exposing some random state secrets.

Many times they've claimed to have important data on a government, business, about a topic.... and done nothing / never mentioned it again. And that's just going by their own tweets.

What is going on in the background I have no idea, but just based on their own efforts to hype data they claimed to have and never release it made me question what they really valued.

Now a real journalist might have information they never release because they aren't sure if it is legit or sometimes even a government asks them to wait (kind a controversial there) but I don't see them claim to have solid evidence and then just not do anything with it. If I take Wikileaks at their word about their information, then I also have to wonder why they chose not to release information that they claimed to have / would release.... And that doesn't account for things like tipping off various politicians ahead of actual releases and etc.

Wikileaks refused to release a giant dump of stolen Russian documents.

Can you provide information on this? I see it all over, but what information did they supposedly have and who is making this claim?