How could WikiLeaks be interpreted as anything other than promoting civil liberties? Its sole purpose is to expose the corrupt behind-the-curtain dealings of leaders and political elite---to give power to the people and remove it from the corrupt.
> Why can't other people be rational like me.
You really need to get out of your own head.
Perhaps taken at face value that's true, but I judge them by their actions:
* They consistently advocate for one political point of view, an anti-US government one. Where are leaks about Putin? Bernie Sanders? Jill Stein? For comparison, the NY Times is hard on both candidates: For example, they both broke the Clinton email server story and Trump's tax return.
* They are cooperating in what appears to be a Russian intelligence disinformation campaign to disrupt U.S. democracy. Assange seems too smart to be an unwitting participant.
* There are reports it's due to a vendetta Assange has against Clinton.
Based on the above and other actions, I question whether their mission really is to promote civil liberties.
I see what they claim to do, but it's too important to take at face value.
I'll disagree with that and get on with life.