Add to Flipboard Magazine.

Moves like Jagger

Game Of US America Elections: The Card Game - Back Us On Kickstarter
  • Fukui-sanYesOta

    Haha, it's funny because he's charged with sexual assault.

  • glasspusher

    Encumbered with a low self image, Julian disguises himself as a speed bump.

  • IonaTrailer

    Mittens secrets are out of the closet!!!!
    "Gawker has obtained a large cache of confidential internal financial documents from more than 20 secretive hedge funds and other investment vehicles in which Mitt Romney has stashed his considerable wealth."
    Woooo-woooo! He's going DOWN! http://gawker.com/5933641

    • sullivanst

      Not based on the analysis they'd done by a couple of hours ago, there really wasn't anything to tie any decision making to him.

      • IonaTrailer

        Yes, but it's his money. When people get a real look at how his money people shelter his do-ray-me, it's not going to look good.

        • sullivanst

          It's shady, but it's also really complicated, and we already knew he had large sums of money oversees. I haven't yet seen anything there that's going to hurt him more than what we already knew, although an extra round of bad press for him isn't anything I object to ;).

          • IonaTrailer

            Hopefully they'll keep digging and maybe they'll find something shady.

          • miss_grundy

            Doesn't he have shares in a company that deals in medical waste including the disposition of aborted fetuses. If they could directly connect his wealth to owning shares of that company, that might hurt him with the idiot base that buys into the anti-abortion stance he has now taken.

          • sullivanst

            He didn't personally own those shares. They were purchased by one of the Bain entities in the period between 1999-2002, his name appears in an SEC filing because he still had 100% ownership of the Bain entity at the time. It was that filing that led to the whole spat about whether or not he was retired. But those who accept that he was retired are also going to exonerate him of any blame associated with the medical waste company; that happens to cover almost all of the people who would actually have a major problem with the company in question.

    • comrad_darkness

      You're teasing us. No way.

      • IonaTrailer

        Way!

    • http://for-the-turnstiles.blogspot.com 4TheTurnstiles

      more likely: he accepted the amnesty deal that was offered a few years back for tax fugitives… which is to say, Romney may well be a felon who will never go to prison for his crimes.
      http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/08/21/mitts-big-

      • IonaTrailer

        Yes, I bet he did accept the 2009 IRS amnesty, too. THAT alone doesn't look good, because it raises the question of how much taxes he potentially should have paid. Rich scumbag.

        • viennawoods13

          He's saying now he doesn't want to release his taxes because he doesn't want to reveal how much he tithed; that's a private matter. And Ann cries when they hand over the tithe check, because it's all just so wonderful and meaningful.

          • Chichikovovich

            It's a tithe, for Pete's sake. So it's presumably 10%. That's what a tithe is. And we don't have to just rest on semantics: In the Robin Roberts interview where Ann said "We've given you people all you need to know", she also talked about how Mitt was such a wonderful person, and exhibit A was that he gave 10% of his income to the LDS church every year.

            You can brag about it on ABC News and three weeks later it is suddenly so private that it would violate your compact with God to disclose it? Lady, you already let that cat out of the bag!

          • Butch_Wagstaff

            There's some speculation (and it would be irresponsible not to speculate, right?) that maybe Romney has been cheating both his "church" and the government so that's now why he insists his tax info should not be made public.

          • ChuckieJesus

            it's one thing to piss off your government, it's another thing entirely to piss off your… pastor? priest? poobah? what do mormons have, again?

            it's hard to imagine mormons getting pissed, but i imagine it happens.

          • sullivanst

            I'd be interested to know what proportion of the Mormon church's operating budget is spent on attempting to convert mainstream Christians. I mean, a pretty big proportion of their budget (apart from, of course, fighting tooth and nail against same-sex marriage) is spent on "missions" (read: recruitment), right?

            I've always wondered how well it would go down in the South if you could say $x million of Mitt's money went towards trying to convert good Baptists to Mormonism.

    • Fox E. Puppet

      I liked this take on the news from the New Yawker: http://nyr.kr/Np7VhA

      "One question is whether the Romneys will now, finally, realize the value of straightforwardness on this most basic point; if they do, we may have good cause to thank Gawker. Mitt Romney might, too—whether he knows it now or not."

      • sullivanst

        Actually, New Yorker angles at a good point, that kind of shows the most likely way this could hurt Romney.

        Romney's campaign is centrally based on the claim that his Bain experience means he underestands the economy. The Gawker papers could quite easily be used to build the case that Romney's Bain experience means his understanding of the economy is mostly limited to knowing how to avoid paying taxes by creating fictions, and that this is entirely irrelevant to running a national economy, and that furthermore there is tremendous danger in allowing someone who believes it is relevant to run a national economy, as they will likely believe many things that are the opposite of the truth.

    • Negropolis

      Gawker is so fucking weird. The vast majority of their work is just plain trashy, and that attracts really trashy, shallow, stupid comments. But, then every once in awhile they root out a truffle.

  • YouBetcha

    I have successfully avoided all Wikileaks news. I have no idea what a Wikileaks is, or why this Assange character is on the run. Please don't shatter my innocence, Wonkette.

    • comrad_darkness

      It's about trying to put water in a basket. Now, go back to sleep.

      • viennawoods13

        And here I thought it was put the LOTION in the basket.

        • Fukui-sanYesOta

          The lotion is for the skin. Or it gets the hose again.

          • http://wonkette.com Lionel[redacted]Esq

            I always love playing "Lambs."

    • Crank_Tango

      I thought I had a wikileak the other day but it was just a really weird, wet fart. I called it a phantom shart….

    • rocktonsam

      wonkette=innocence shatterers

      are you new? haha

  • http://www.vinoverve.com Maman

    Yeah, but now he has to live in Ecuador… plus, he is unlikely to find his hosts without flaws. And that will prove awkward.

  • http://zvibleindmeis.tumblr.com/ Spurning Beer

    Mr. Assange is a disguise artist's dream. He's a tabula rasa.

    • http://www.vinoverve.com Maman

      and by that you mean albino?

      • glasspusher

        Srsly, I grew out my hair once, once, to a pony tail a few years back, and decided to take the opportunity to dress up as Vincent Vega (and ms glasspusher as Mia Wallace) from Pulp Fiction. I colored my hair, and especially my eyebrows brown for this, and when I did, even I didn't recognize myself in the mirror. Makes quite a difference having visible eyebrows!

      • ShreditorsDesk

        He's an Etch-a-Sketch !

    • OzoneTom

      Also, this shows that Mittens was correct about British security.

  • Fox E. Puppet

    What significance should we attach to the fact that this is a ReWritable disc?

    • http://wonkette.com/ weejee

      Well it worked for RoboMittens.

      • glasspusher

        Yeah, but it's been done too much on Mittens, and the bad sectors are starting to show.

    • glasspusher

      He's a cheap bastard?

    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      It's a reference to Bradley Manning, who sometimes used rewritable audio CDs of Lady Gaga during his expropriation of all those leaked documents.

      • glasspusher

        Ahh…that's deep. Thanks!

      • Fox E. Puppet

        Thanks- I did not know that. Lady Gaga has been around longer than I thought…

        • Fukui-sanYesOta

          Did the stupid cartoon make any fucking sense without knowing that?

          I did know that and still found it at most mildly mouth-edge curling.

  • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Johnny-Appletruth/133951326629923?sk=wall deanbooth

    Leave Julian alone!!!

    * cries *

    • bibliotequetress

      Sorry, my friend. Despite desperately wanting government transparency, the crapsplotch Assange made of Wikileaks and the fact that, you know. he's a rapist, means no tears from me. You cry alone. But I will pat your shoulder in a vaguely comforting way and bring you a Somebody-Must-Have-Died Ham, as generations of my ancestors have done for loved ones with sadness.

      • Boojum

        He wasn't accused of rape. He was accused of continuing to fuck after a condom broke during consensual sex.

        • bibliotequetress

          It began as consensual sex. The condom broke and she told him to stop. She ceased consenting. Perhaps he thought she could "close down" and not get pregnant?

          • Boojum

            Actually, I don't think either of them knew the condom broke until after. She did not tell him to stop, in any event.

          • bibliotequetress

            Sorry, but consensual sex ends when either party stops consenting. Just because someone is okay with a blow job, does not mean he/she is okay with anal, et cetera. "Stop" is the universal safe word. When she tried to shove him off of her, he had a lot of options. He had a world of safe targets he could have jizzed on. For whatever reasons, he opted to continue and ejaculate inside her. Even if we ignore the emotional pain– and the pain of having sex with someone wearing a broken condom, which anyone with even a trace amount of pubic hair and/or a labia knows can be akin to having a rubber band rubbed briskly agains a strawberry – this risked her wellbeing in significant ways that it did not risk his wellbeing.

            Edit: Here's the Guardian coverage of the testimony. I was incorrect in that the woman whom Assange held down and would not give her an opportunity to get a condom was not the woman with whom he was having sex when the condom broke, but the younger woman who he was he was engaging in foreplay with who he then began to have sex with and would not allow her to get a condom.
            My bad. My memory from listening to this on Sky and reading it in the Guardian two years ago was clouded by my disgust by the testimony and Assange's reaction, and I conflated the two women.
            http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/12/julia

          • viennawoods13

            I'm also not impressed that when he went to the embassy and left British jurisdiction, one friend who had stood bail for him then became liable to pay 20 thousand pounds. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikilea

      • http://www.facebook.com/pages/Johnny-Appletruth/133951326629923?sk=wall deanbooth

        Wikileaks is a force for good, and Assange deserves praise for his role in that. As for being a creep, I don't care much — the Venn diagram of heroes and attention whores has always had a large overlapping area.

        I don't know enough to form a firm opinion of the rape charge. But I do know that I am very suspicious of what's going on with the pursuit of Assange. What the US has done to Bradley Manning is a disgrace; the government clearly seems more concerned with revenge than with justice, and these are the same people anxious to get their hands on Assange. I do not trust them.

        • Fox E. Puppet

          I have to agree with you. Personally am not an Assange fan, but the timing & circumstances of the rape accusations are suspicious to me. Since I wasn't there, I can't know if there was consent from start to finish, but I do know that there was plenty of opportunity & motive for a frame-up…

          Agnostic on this one…

  • http://wonkette.com Lionel[redacted]Esq

    Did he drop his victims off at a swing set? Otherwise, my understanding is it is not a sex crime.

    • glasspusher

      Indeed. Swinger != swing set.

    • Come here a minute

      Julian Assange did not commit "legitamate" espionage because the Obama administration enjoyed it, and showed cleavage.

      • HateMachine

        Yeah, if it was legitimate espionage, then my understanding is that the DoD has a way to shut that whole thing down.

    • larrykat

      If any of his so-called victims are pregnant, you can scratch that charge off the list.

  • http://wonkette.com/ weejee

    Lisbeth, the girl with the dragon tattoo, can find Ecuador – no prob.

    • http://krisbunda.com/blog/index.php Designer_Rants

      And kick a vibrator into his butt.

  • Callyson

    OT alert:

    For you Wonketteers who have been speculating that dark forces in the GOP (yes, I know this phrase is redundant) are working on a plan to force Todd Akin out of the race:

    Todd Akin Threat: U.S. Capitol Police Investigating Threat Against Missouri Congressman

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/23/todd-aki

    • IonaTrailer

      Maybe it's pissed off dykes looking to seek some retribution for the women of America. In flannel. With chainsaws.

      • http://dismalpseudoscientist.wordpress.com Incitefully_Joe

        FAP.

    • RadioBowels

      Fuck that, we want this piece of shit around for as long as possible.

    • Fox E. Puppet

      The nicest thing about Akin is how very many, many people he's managed to piss off recently.

      More people voted agin' him than for him in the Primary, but there were 8 candidates & the state's "Right To Pray" referendum on the ballot naturally favored turnout in favor of Religiowacko Akin.

      Also, I believe that MO has an open primary system, meaning that some of McCaskill's supporters may have decided to vote for Akin in the GOP primary since McCaskill was running unopposed. (Turnout for the GOP primary was unusually high while the Dem turnout was unusually low…)

  • RadioBowels

    How in the hell did he get past TSA???!!1!?!1???!!?!11??

  • bibliotequetress

    Ecuador! Lovely land of freedom and free speech! Paradiso where no one would be targeted for publi
    Oh, oopsidoodles! http://www.hrw.org/americas/ecuador

    • http://twitter.com/iburl iburl

      Let's keep the pressure on all the abusers equally. Human rights watch is right. But,
      I'm sure Ecuador would be paradisio to anybody facing Bradley Manning's world of 23 hour solitary confinement, harassment, sleep-deprivation and various other forms of can't-call-it-torture-when-the-prez-is-a-democrat.

      • bibliotequetress

        I feel for Manning, think he was exploited by Assange and abused by the military, and I think both Assange has hung him out to dry and military intelligence has scapegoated him.

        • http://twitter.com/iburl iburl

          There can be more than one scapegoat.

          Notice that in our playful bickering no mention has been made of the thousands of stories that Assange and Manning brought to light of slightly more global importance and lethal consequence, such as war crimes and the killing of civilians. We are killing the messenger because we don't want to hear the message.

          • bibliotequetress

            Wikileaks brought some very important stories to light from the Manning disc. This is true. By dumping the intelligence in an unread tranche, though, Wikileaks also released painful personal information about people on both sides of the conflict– personnel who had to return to the US quickly due to the suicide of a family member in one instance, as an example– and whether we like it or not, did reveal information that put people at risk. And, frankly, a lot of the tranche was mundane, notable for the quantity more than the content; it was not as interesting as a random volume of FRUS or a browse through the CIA FOIA reading room. Even some of this mundane material exposed either the US, or other governments, or various people to public embarrassment over matters that are pretty common in the scheme of political history but have caused some immediate diplomatic or humanitarian problems, notably in Egypt and, of course, Ecuador.

            This was not the Pentagon Papers, because the unauthorized release of the Pentagon Papers was done by people, and one person in particular, who knew what they were handling and deliberately released information selected to expose what was and what had been happening in southeast Asia at American (and French) hands, exposing the inhumanity and futility of any "noble" arguments about US involvement. What Wikileaks ended up doing, which was quite different from how they began, was an indiscriminate information dump. We may not like it but we, the US, end up with information that can hurt a lot of people by it's mere exposure in public. In the past, Wikileaks used to expose governments classifying information foolishly, or protecting documents that revealed misdeeds, or governments not releasing information that the public needed to have to make decisions in their best interests.

            The Manning material has bits of some of that, information that we benefit by it's availability so we can face our failures and our acts of arrogance. That we, the public, should use. But it was mixed with a lot of information that was either released pointlessly or could really be damaging to people who should not be at risk but now are. Maybe no one has been hurt. Maybe a lot of people have, We will not know until someday individuals can come forward and talk about it, and we probably will never know all of it. Assange could have used some common sense and this *could* have been like the Pentagon Papers. He chose not to. I have questions about the manner in which the US has been pursuing Assange through third-country pressure although I'm not terribly surprised he's being pursued. He did break a US law, and even if his motives were pure the US would pursue him. That he is not a US citizen is not relevant to the particular law; if I bought a second hand nuclear warhead that I knew happened to have been stolen from the Russian military, Russia would find me criminally responsible and would want to get me on Russian soil.
            I was disposed to think the rape charges were exaggerated, not fabricated but dramatized for leverage against Assange, until I read the proceedings, including Assange's own lawyer's response.

            Sorry, iburl, I'm getting so tired I can't spell or type anymore. Please feel free to respond even though I will be in bed in five minutes, not ignoring you.

          • http://twitter.com/iburl iburl
  • Crank_Tango

    This is like when I was in my hometown of Buffalo, southern canada city, and OJ was on the run, and we were like "Yeah! Go OJ! …uh wait why is he running if he isn't a fucking murderer…oh…"

    • http://www.vinoverve.com Maman

      Did I know that you came from the Niagara Frontier? or have I lost my mind. again.

      btw. OJ ran because that is what he does. and what one does when the cops are ready to plant evidence to convict the nearest black guy.

  • http://www.vinoverve.com Maman

    Mr. Assange does realize that the UK has no respect for the sovereignty of South American countries…. just saying.

  • Beowoof

    You know a Swedish jail would be preferable to Ecuador.

    • Negropolis

      Depends on how long the Swedish let him stay, no?

  • sbj1964

    In the words of Beretta" Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.Don't do it!"

  • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

    Remember when someone in the Iranian Libyan (edited) embassy in London shot and killed that woman bobby? The Brits didn't even think about storming the Iranian embassy when that happened, and in fact ended up letting the shooter drive to the airport and fly home.

    Julian Assange, however, who is apparently only wanted for questioning, has to hole up there for weeks and the government contemplates violating several hundred years of diplomatic tradition to get him — not to arrest him, mind you, since he's not charged with anything yet. Must be some kinda dangerous.

    ETA: here's the link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Yvonne_Fle

    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      I don't see anyone from the UK government threatening to enter the embassy. I see a lot of whining about a rumour from the Ecuadorians.

      The SAS did storm the Iranian embassy back in 1980 to rescue hostages.

      The Yvonne Fletcher thing was awful.

      • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

        The Iranian embassy was stormed by SAS troops after it was taken over so it wasn't a violation of Iranian sovereignty.

        I don't think Assange's behavior with the women who accused him is excusable, but in no other similar case would he be extradited solely for questioning without an indictment. I don't think the charges or the women's testimony is bullshit — however, the extent the authorities are pursuing him is.

        • Fukui-sanYesOta

          I'd agree with you in that. There seems like an awful lot of pressure being put on the UK government from somewhere.

          edit: and my apologies, you were correct in your original post

          "In 2012 the UK government said it was considering using the law" relating to entering embassies.

          This would be an extremely silly move by the UK government and I'm embarrassed they'd even mention it.

    • Guppy

      The Brits didn't even think about storming the Iranian embassy when that happened

      And then the Brits passed a law saying they would storm an embassy if one harbored a fugitive like that again.

      Scroll down to the "See Also" section of the Wikipedia article you linked to.

      • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

        So someone using diplomatic immunity to avoid prosecution for shooting a bunch of people and murdering one of them is the same as someone hiding out because he's being ruthlessly persecuted without having been indicted yet? Not quite sure that's equivalent.

        • Guppy

          This particular "storm the embassy" law has been on the books for about 15 years, and the UK is obliged to recognize a European Arrest Warrant. The I's are dotted and the T's crossed.

          • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

            To the contrary, Interpol has no police authority and EAWs are nothing more than validation that an arrest warrant exists for a particular person and a particular accusation. Each member nation of Interpol is allowed to deal with EAWs according to their own policy.

            I'm not defending Assange against the accusation that he had nonconsensual sex. But bringing him in for questioning just seems like a pretext for fucking him over for releasing embarrassing cables about the US. Sweden has repeatedly refused offers to question Assange anywhere but Sweden. Why is that?

          • Guppy

            IANAL, but I'm pretty sure EAW's are an EU thing, not an Interpol thing; more analogous to interstate extradition in the US.

          • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

            You're right — sorry for confusing the two. It seems, though, that the constraints of the EAW regulations give Britain plenty of leeway for refusing to extradite Assange, including human rights:

            "No person should be removed, expelled or extradited to a State where there is a serious risk that he or she would be subjected to the death penalty, torture or other inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment."

            If I were worried that my questioning was a ruse to extradite me to the US, where people have been held in solitary, tortured, and driven insane (viz. Jose Padilla), I would consider that legitimate grounds for refusal to extradite.

          • shelwood46

            They apparently want to question him in Sweden because if they do decide to bring charges based on the questioning, they have exactly 14 days until the trial starts once charges are filed. If they don't have him in custody at that point, he goes free, period. So if they question him in the UK, and he can go 15 days without being brought to Sweden, he gets off.

          • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

            Um — do you have a citation for that? I've tried looking that up and haven't found anything in my brief search, but my initial thought would be that it would be a highly impractical way to run a civilization if every criminal got off after two weeks in hiding.

          • Fukui-sanYesOta

            There's a little confusion here from shelwood.

            The UK used to be similar. If you are in *UK* custody (prior to the act changing this), you had I think seven or fourteen days to be charged, or you're out. There was a big, big fight to make this 28 days by law for terrorism offences. Which passed.

            Assange needs to be in Swedish custody for fourteen days without charge before he gets the free pass. Custody in the UK and Sweden are not comparable, and don't affect the individual laws of the country: in that, shelwood is wrong. The UK can hold him for a few days, then extradite, and the clock restarts in Sweden.

            Jose Padilla was sickening to the rest of the world. He was held without charge for, what, over a year? That was bullshit.

            Free-est country in the world.

  • ttommyunger

    "Not intended as a factual story".

  • anniegetyerfun

    This could make my NRP-laden drive home extremely annoying as Melissa Block breathlessly asks one British correspondent after another just HOW THIS COULD HAPPEN. Please let it not happen.

    • http://krisbunda.com/blog/index.php Designer_Rants

      I could basically listen to Melissa Block recite a phone book. Some of my local state public radio people make me realize how good NPR is. It's like their (the locals') throats make clicking and/or grinding noises – and I have to turn that shit off.

      • anniegetyerfun

        Well, she's miles better than Michele Norris, who used to slobber through every segment about food.

  • http://twitter.com/iburl iburl

    1. Disguise a hollywood makeup artist as a lawyer and sneak him into the embassy.
    2. Coat the walls with tin foil.
    3. ?
    4. Escape in the laundry basket.

    • http://hong-kong-actresses.blogspot.com/ Chow Yun Flat

      Merry Wives of Windsor!

  • rocktonsam

    oh cripes, aren't we done with this guy already

  • http://inappropriatejobpostings.blogspot.com/ fuflans

    jesus and OT but listening to jane mayer on fresh air discussing bamz' lack of post CU fund-raising savvy is scaring the living daylights out of me.

    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      Whenever I'm getting scared about the latest polls or fundraising, I head here and cheer myself up.

      • http://krisbunda.com/blog/index.php Designer_Rants

        I go there religiously, and swing state polls have been trending toward Romney lately, which makes me haz a sad. But this has also happened several times in the last few months, then trends back toward Obama.

  • TavariousChinaSmith

    Can Bradley Manning haz asylums?

  • TavariousChinaSmith

    If Assange disguises himself as a Lady Gaga CD-RW, he could be extraordinarily rendited by the RIAA, and that could be even scarier for him than what the CIA has in mind. A Radiohead CD-RW might be safer.

  • FrankFuror

    So guys, I'm a little confused. Why are we suddenly unconcerned about all the things that Wikileaks outed, and instead decided to stone-cold hate on Assange? Is it because the spectre of sexual assault was brought up? Or is it because Bamz is in charge now and we don't want to think of all the nasty things that the country did under shrub, including some things we're still doing? From an outside perspective, that kinda looks like what's going on here.

    I guess my question is if Assange did say fuck it, go back to Sweden, and then suddenly found himself in US custody, what would we do then? Would we be this blasé about it?

    • tejanojim

      Word. This whole thing has always seemed suspicious to me, but when the British government is threatening to storm a foreign embassy in order to get a guy who is wanted for questioning for sexual assault, my bullshit meter goes off the charts.

      I don't condone sexual assault of any kind, I wasn't there and I don't know what happened, and if Assange committed a crime I hope he is tried, convicted, and serves an appropriate sentence. But if you can't see that there's something else going on here, you're probably choosing not to look.

  • ChernobylSoup

    Dude talked a child soldier into committing treason. I don't think Assange is a good person.

    • GregComlish

      Ok

      1) USA doesn't enlist child soldiers
      2) Manning wasn't a child
      3) Manning acted on his own conscience because he wanted to end the war
      4) Manning approached wikileaks with the leaks

      • poorgradstudent

        Thank you.

    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      A very mixed-up child soldier, who was out to his fellow soldiers before the repeal of DADT. The kid wasn't right, sadly, and fought depression and isolation.

      In my opinion, Assange is a straight-up dick. That doesn't justify his classification as a terrorist, nor does it mean he shouldn't help the Swedish plod with their enquiries.

  • http://dismalpseudoscientist.wordpress.com Incitefully_Joe

    OT: In other news about cases I'm not sure quite what to make of, Lance Armstrong!

    Basically, I'm either forced to believe either that:
    a) After 17 years of inquiry, including several investigation attempts that came back inconclusive, the Feds SUDDENLY JUST NOW FINALLY amassed ironclad, overwhelming, and damning evidence that Lance Armstrong was doping, which totally justified the nearly 20 years of investigations,
    or
    b) Lance Armstrong is so fed up with being dogged by said inconclusive and *totally drummed up* allegations that he's willing to not only abandon the sport, but allow these charges to *completely wipe out* his title as Greatest Bicyclist in the World and Also Inspiration to Millions of Cancer Survivors.

    Neither one of those really passes the bullshit test, unless I'm missing something else?

    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      I found this interesting.

      The runners-up in his TDF victories, and who's been busted since.

      • http://dismalpseudoscientist.wordpress.com Incitefully_Joe

        Half of them seem to have been caught as a result of one sting operation, which certainly does raise some sample-size issues, honestly.

        Still, "doping, but so was fucking everybody else in the field at that level" wouldn't be terribly surprising I guess. It would also, coincidentally, be an accurate description of fucking every professional sport in existence, one or two generations ago. I utter a forceful "meh".

        • Fukui-sanYesOta

          That's also my feeling about it. Looks like everyone else was doping, so he probably was as well, and his achievements are still great. Doesn't make him less of a dick for doing it, if he did.

          However, "meh" kinda covers it.

          • RadioBowels

            Tx Fukui, because I've had a very meh day. (But I'm good.)

          • Fukui-sanYesOta

            Radio, I have a lot to talk to you about but I'm not ready yet.

            One day soon, and I'm glad you're good.

      • Fox E. Puppet

        That is suggestive, indeed. I have had my doubts about him, & wouldn't care too much about him doing the same thing all his competitors were doing, but he always seemed pretty self-righteous about the whole thing.

    • http://lostintarnation.blogspot.com/ SayItWithWookies

      I'm so disappointed. I thought he was clean, but not fighting the charges seems like a copout. Then again, I thought he had just beat a civil suit about him doping, and the Anti-Doping Association (or whatever the last A stands for) had standards that were pretty low, and thus hard to fight. But then some other prominent cyclists have said they saw him doping too. As much as I wished the charges weren't true, it's hard to understand his crummy statement as anything short of an admission. Yuck.

    • Lascauxcaveman

      Well, they've tested him a zillion times over the years and never caught him doping, so despite testimony of the guys he's mercilessly beaten over the years, their tests are either a bad joke, or he's had some secret dope that others didn't have or he's clean or … eh, who gives a shit?

      I'm still going to ride my bike to work tomorrow, because the weatherman says it's going to be sunny but not too hot. This is what I'm thinking.

    • http://www.flickr.com/photos/30500320@N06/ DerrickWildcat

      I want to believe Lance, but I'm suspicious of anyone that can win the TDF 7 times. I think he left for awhile and came back and won it again. I just don't see how it's humanely possible to do that without a little help.

      • http://dismalpseudoscientist.wordpress.com Incitefully_Joe

        I dunno, I get a little leery of the "he won a lot, so therefore he must have been doping" line of logic. See Michael Phelps and his many medals, who, despite specious claims from China, only seems to have been doing the other kind of dope.

  • littlebigdaddy

    Does anyone else think that Assange looks like Mr. Humphreys from Are You Being Served?

    • Fox E. Puppet

      Yes.

  • poorgradstudent

    "Good for him" is all I'm gonna say.

    Well, okay, I need an excuse to procrastinate so let me add…

    Yes, maybe Assange is a huge asshole or at least difficult to deal with in person, and I don't agree with Naomi Wolf that there's an elaborate international conspiracy afoot (although I do think there's been a conscious tendency among certain segments of the media to play up the charges in order to duck the topic of Wikileaks, if not discredit it). But the case against him in Sweden is convoluted enough to have people who know way more about such legal topics than I do or I suspect most people in this thread do arguing away endlessly, so there *is* reason to question the charges, despite the judgment of the UK and Swedish courts. More to the point, disputing the charges doesn't make one either a mindless apologist for Assange or an Akin-esque "gray rape" definer, anymore than believing that Assange is guilty of sexual assault makes one a willing pawn of the governments Wikileaks embarrassed.

    (As for Bradley Manning, since he came up for some reason…one person's whistleblower is another person's traitor; and there should be no question even among people who would put him in the traitor column that his treatment by the government has been inexcusable and clearly part of a ham-fisted crusade against future whistleblowers in general and Wikileaks in particular. But if you're going to cavalierly deem him a traitor then you have to call Daniel Ellsberg a traitor too.)

    Okay, now *that's* all I'm gonna say. It's always fun when there's dissension among the ranks! Reminds me of the Ken Layne days when us firebaggers and the Obamapologists would go at it…

  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/30500320@N06/ DerrickWildcat

    Ecuador built their National Soccer Stadium on top of a mountain so any opponents they play there fall down and die because they can't breathe.

    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      Doesn't really help that their capital is, what, 8000 feet above sea level?

      • http://www.flickr.com/photos/30500320@N06/ DerrickWildcat

        Elevation Stadium City
        11,929 Hernando Siles La Paz, Bolivia
        10,656 Garcilasco de la Vega Cuzco, Peru
        9,222 Olimpico Atahualpa Quito, Ecuador
        8,793 Nemezio Diez Toluca, Mexico
        8,530 Municipal de Calama Calama, Chile
        8,386 El Campin Bogota, Colombia

        12,000 ft. LOL, who'd want to play there?

        • Fukui-sanYesOta

          Bob Beamon?

          • http://www.flickr.com/photos/30500320@N06/ DerrickWildcat

            That's the Long Jumper guy right? It might help a little I guess.

  • PrimlyStable

    Somewhat disappointed to see fellow Wonketteers trundling down the Akin-esque path marked "well it wasn't rape-rape" comments. Not to mention the lazy recycling of Wikiparanoia about how Assange "hasn't even been charged", despite the fact that the Swedish authorities want him extradited specifically so they CAN charge him.

    You may acquaint yourself with some actual facts here: http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/david-allen-gre

    • BigoBangoBongo
    • Fukui-sanYesOta

      See first comment in this thread.

      If Assange is charged after questioning, then he's going to get charged and go to trial.

      It's speculation, but he's an alleged sexual assaulter. I want to see how that pans out.

  • friendlyskies

    Four Corners, an investigative news show out of Australia, did a piece about the rape allegations against Assange. It's interesting, but seems slightly biased toward Assange: http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2012/07/19

    It's just too bad, for everyone, that those women didn't press charges while Assange was still in Sweden, or even later, when he was trying to get a visa to re-enter Sweden. This whole mess would be over, one way or the other, and we could focus on the content of the Wikileaks. But at this point, it's like pitting the Pentagon Papers against the Kardashians in prime time – more people will inevitably be engrossed in the trashy soap opera aspects of the case than the gigabytes of information about war crimes, diplomatic tricks, and corporate thuggery released at such great cost. Anyone can speculate about Manning being an easily manipulated "child soldier," Assange being "creepy," or the rape accusers being "jealous liars" or "victims of misogynist Wikileaks fans." Why? Because we don't know, and we'll never know, but it only takes five minutes to read the tabloid version of events and make a call. It would take much more time and effort to read the Iraq and Afghanistan War Logs, and the "Cablegate" releases, then form an educated opinion about those.

    • PrimlyStable

      The problem lies in people being unable to separate what Assange did with Wikileaks (generally a good thing) with what he allegedly did to two women in Sweden (unquestionably a bad thing). Just because he stuck it to the man with Wikileaks does not mean he is incapable of committing crimes. Nor does it mean that any attempt to bring him to justice over alleged sex crime is a direct result of some grand international conspiracy against him. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

      • Negropolis

        Except that that cigar was so much more than a cigar. That's a very bad example to use if you're going to argue against a conspiracy, that doesn't even begin to mention alluding to a consensual act and an alleged criminal sexual act.

        This issue is just insane with people running to both sides. I don't think you can separate the two issues, completely, though. Trust me, you aren't the only one disappointed in the level and angle of the debate, though, we're definitely disappointed from different angles.

  • http://dismalpseudoscientist.wordpress.com Incitefully_Joe

    So basically, I think Assange himself really just wants to avoid being investigated for these alleged sexual assaults.

    That being said, however, if the US isn't interested in extraditing Assange on unrelated matters whose criminal nature is, frankly, dubious, they definitely have a funny way of signalling as much. I don't think this falls into tin foil hat territory, as the history of the world of espionage, "espionage" and whistleblowers is really fucked up.

    So, in conclusion, Assange is an asshole. The US is an asshole. England, Ecuador, probably Sweden? All assholes. Glenn Greenwald is an asshole, too. Assholes all around.

    • Misty Malarky

      "Assholes all around."

      Thanks! The next round's on me.

    • poorgradstudent

      I know, but really I'd want my money back if a one-time teen hacker prodigy like Assange wasn't at least a bit of a socially dense egotist.

    • sullivanst

      That being said, however, if the US isn't interested in extraditing Assange on unrelated matters whose criminal nature is, frankly, dubious, they definitely have a funny way of signalling as much.

      If the US wanted to extradite Assange, they'd have been positively falling over themselves to do so while he's in the UK, given the bilateral agreement between the US and UK which effectively requires UK courts to extradite anyone the US says it wants, for almost any reason. In particular, there's no requirement that the US provide UK courts with any evidence of guilt, they don't have to make even a prima facie case.

  • http://howtosavetheworld.ca/ BZ1

    Wait a second, he FLEW to Ecuador; what happened to no-fly lists and the such?

  • Ruhe

    I was in Ecuador for a week and a half once on business. Mid 90s. I recall that there were non-uniformed men armed with rifles everywhere we went. "Guards" our driver called them. In that part of the world "safer" is a term of very relative value.

  • FrankFuror

    Apparently my last comment somehow got lost in the works, but I'm going to ask again: I find it fascinating that people here give so much credence to the charges against Assange and are so blase towards the information Wikileaks made public showing US misdeeds. Is this because as Democrats we don't want to own up to the fact that a lot of these misdeeds have continued under Obama? Are we really that partisan?

  • DahBoner

    Jolly Good Show!

  • PB Goodfriend

    I'm just amazed his ego fits on a 700mb disc

Previous articleLouisiana Thinks Funding School Run By ‘Apostle And Prophet’ Is Somehow Constitutional
Next articleExclusive! Here is Your Picture Of Kevin Yoder All Nude-Like In The Sea Of Galilee, Wait No It Isn't