Or, perhaps not.
Foster published an comment later in the story I posted. It says in part...
"...Paul voted against censure before he voted for it. He voted for a net tax hike, period. And I'll leave it to readers to decide if Paul was merely stating the technicality that Assange can't be prosecuted for treason because he's Australian...."
If you want to explore what Paul said about Wikileaks, you might want to start with this story...
December 3, 2010 Texas Rep. Ron Paul: Don’t prosecute WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange
Maybe it's me, but that seems like a full-throated defense of Assange.
Wear a helmet, that wall you are banging your head against is pretty hard...
That's what you call "a full throated defense?" It sounds like he's making a point to me. Where is the hew and cry to prosecute Cong. Jim McDermott? Or John Kerry? Or Bill Clinton? Or, as Ron Paul asked, the NYTs?
I agree with the comments at the end of that article NOT with Newt. Assange is an Australian “opportunist” and the creep who leaked the docs may be up for treason.
And why do we honor the NY SLimes when they leak things but now we seek to punish these guys.
After all, lots of what is coming out is damaging the left. Keep it coming I say. This govt needs to be brought to its heels. The State Dept needs to be thoroughly scrubbed and heads there roll.