A problem does not only become a problem the moment you start looking. Is it not for the best if the people of a country are aware of how the people in power use their power? The problem is not that a person decided to leak said emails, it is the fact that these emails were sent in the first place. The US democracy was not weakened through this, this weakness was only made more apparent.

Perhaps they aren’t pressing those charges precisely because they believe they wouldn’t have a strong case, then.

While there are bits of truth in this comment, much of it is exaggerated and unsubstantiated, namely:

- Being a verified Russian asset

- Working with Russia to specifically help elect Trump to the office of president

- Specifically seeking to weaken US democracy

Going to need sources and supporting evidence proportionate to the extent of your claims.

Which bits are true?

Came back to answer but the comment got flagged, but I think I remember it being that he chose not to publish RNC info received at roughly the same time as the DNC emails.

That said, I just fact-checked myself and found that the RNC stuff was already public and that was Assange's reason for not publishing. So I'm not sure anything in the comment I was replying to can be substantiated.

Nearly 8 years later and you still seriously believe Trump won the 2016 election via Russian interference? Even after all investigations yielded no evidence?

The investigations yielded evidence on most of it, which neither party denies. What was inconclusive was whether or not Trump (and his immediate family) were aware enough to qualify as "conspiracy" or "coordination" charges. That Russia interfered is not disputed. They indicted 34 people.

>and worked with them to help Trump become president and weaken US democracy by releasing the Clinton emails when he was ordered.

This has become such a tedious point of hate against Assange, and all the more so because it's so badly unfounded, much like the absurdly time-consuming and costly hullabaloo about Trump himself becoming president due to "collusion" with Russia. I suppose the several dozen million people who voted for Trump in the U.S. just can't be viewed as anything more than brainless peons who couldn't have possibly had any sort of personal motive for doing so? They were all brainwashed? Unlike the enlightened voters for the other side?

That the NY Times and other socially elite media organizations couldn't get over the simple truth of so many people that they ignored in turn ignoring these media organizations' supposedly enlightened pronouncements is one thing. That so many other ordinary progressives can't stand the idea is a bit more absurd.

If you need to sink to the level of promoting conspiracy theories, supporting grotesque miscarriages of legal procedure and actively applauding the suppression of evidence inconvenient to your preferred side of the spectrum, you've lost intellectual credibility.

> let's no forget he is also a Russian asset

No one with half a brain believes that. Please try harder.