and your interpretation of the last sentence of your quote is lacking.
That he finds Trump 'unpredictable' is hardly a love letter or recommendation. In context, it means: If Trump is actually going to do what he occasionally suggests, then he might be less of a problem than others when it comes to war and military interventions. BUT, everyone who watched the Primaries knows for a fact that he is 'completely unpredictable', that he says one thing today and may be doing the complete opposite tomorrow.
On Clinton, Assange also only states what everybody knows and adds that he doesn't think she is 'unpredictable' in that regard:
“She has a long history of being a liberal war hawk, and we presume she is going to proceed” with that approach if elected president, he said.
So, yes, IF Trump stands by what he has said, he might be preferable for Assange and other peace activists. But we are well aware that he most certainly won't. Most of us remember that Bush II prior to 9/11 repeatedly spoke out against 'nation-building', in his debates with Gore he actually had a position on war and interventions that could not be characterised as 'hawkish'. And look what we got a few months later.
= new reply since forum marked as read
