SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the One-man-takes-on-US-Government;-who-will-prevail? dept.
Assange Indicted Under Espionage Act, Raising First Amendment Issues
Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks leader, has been indicted on 17 new counts of violating the Espionage Act for his role in publishing classified military and diplomatic documents in 2010, the Justice Department announced on Thursday — a novel case that raises profound First Amendment issues.
The new charges were part of a superseding indictment obtained by the Trump administration that significantly expanded the legal case against Mr. Assange, who is already fighting extradition proceedings in London based on an earlier hacking-related count brought by federal prosecutors in Northern Virginia.
[...] On its face, the Espionage Act could also be used to prosecute reporters who publish government secrets. But many legal scholars believe that prosecuting people for acts related to receiving and publishing information would violate the First Amendment.
That notion has never been tested in court, however, because until now the government has never brought such charges. The closest it came was indicting two lobbyists for a pro-Israel group in 2005 who received classified information about American policy toward Iran and passed it on. But that case fell apart after several skeptical pretrial rulings by a judge, and the charges were dropped.
Though he is not a conventional journalist, much of what Mr. Assange does at WikiLeaks is difficult to distinguish in a legally meaningful way from what traditional news organizations like The New York Times do: seek and publish information that officials want to be secret, including classified national security matters, and take steps to protect the confidentiality of sources.
Also at BBC, CNBC, USA Today, and Reuters
Previously: Inadvertent Court Filing Suggests that the U.S. DoJ is Preparing to Indict Julian Assange
U.S. Ramping Up Probe Against Julian Assange, WikiLeaks Says
Wikileaks Co-Founder Julian Assange Arrested at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London
Julian Assange Sentenced to 50 Weeks in Prison for Bail Breach
Swedish Prosecutor to Reopen Julian Assange Investigation
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Friday May 24 2019, @12:23PM (13 children)
What a farce. But, as has been said before: a grand jury would indict a ham sandwich. It's a shame, because a bit of common sense would see these charges as the farce that they are. However, some federal prosecutors are hoping to make their names, by prosecuting such a high profile case, so there's simply no way they will see reason and drop the charges.
It's a shame that Assange is such a jerk. Not that being a jerk is a crime, but is surely does make it hard to remember that he's the "good guy" in this case. Fact is, democratic governments shouldn't be allow many secrets. The secrets published by Assange should have seem a number of important people jailed. Of course, that didn't happen, but he did embarrass them, and that is unforgivable.
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @12:51PM (12 children)
Julian Assange is going to get the Saddam Hussein treatment.
The justification has already been sold to the american public as an enemy.
America is great again, following by the playbook again!
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 24 2019, @01:43PM (11 children)
Assange won't be hanged, or executed by any other means. He MIGHT suicide. Seriously, he is a candidate for suicide. He's been more-or-less imprisoned already for - what? 7 years? If he's successfully extradited, and dragged to the US, they're going to pile as many charges as possible on him. He'll be facing about ten thousand years in prison, plus ten or more life sentences, all to be served consecutively. Who do we know of who has caved under such bullshit before? One name, at least, should come readily to mind for all nerds/geeks/techs.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @02:04PM
Compared to Saddam he is a small input bound to return a small output. But the procedure is the same. He is going to be made an example of, and judiciary hates everything that questions system the most - which is what Julian Assange is. Being a non-citizen, his rights are going to be the same as that of a Guantanamo Bay prisoner-for-life, and judges are going to invent new definitions to hang him, ignoring precedences like anything.
Any pretense of rule of law will be laid bare and nobody will care because it is too depressing to acknowledge. Next morning will still have a sunrise, and there will be bitter fights over rape and rape culture and trans-rights to be fought over. And the correlation between color and culture, and Jesus and Russia.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @03:11PM (9 children)
What if he has evidence that will hang Trump?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 24 2019, @03:42PM (8 children)
*rolleyes*
There's no such thing. We all know what Trump is. But, there is no law against being a douche, or a horse's ass, or an unscrupulous businessman, or any of the other things that Trump is. That Trump Derangement Syndrome wants to dream that Trump is something worse, or something greater, or whatever, but, it just ain't so. He is just some rich man's kid, who learned how to lie and cheat, and bend the business world to his will, in the process growing crazy-rich. And, most of America, most of the world, admires him and his peers. Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Elon Musk, and that little wanker at Facefook. Some of them were more honest, some of them less honest, but each of them stayed within the law, and got filthy rich. Which makes the all heroes to the typical American.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 3, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @03:52PM (7 children)
Did you read the Mueller Report or are you waiting for the graphic novel version?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 24 2019, @04:07PM (4 children)
What, exactly, in the Mueller report, are you referring to? I actually read the first few pages. I skimmed much of the rest. I found no "smoking gun".
Even I can be put off by excessive verbiage that ultimately says nothing.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 4, Informative) by DeathMonkey on Friday May 24 2019, @06:07PM (3 children)
Ten documented cases of Obstruction of Justice. But you know this already...
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 24 2019, @06:21PM (2 children)
Yeah, whatever. You can call it obstruction of justice - I'll call it obstruction of a bunch of busybodies.
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @08:51PM
Then your argument is a complete load of nonsense.
Obstruction is a legal term with a legal definition.
What YOU have is an opinion, and an uninformed one at that. And they are worthless.
But don't worry. You are protected by your 'I can never be wrong' bubble so its all good.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @10:38PM
lol getting reaaaal dumb these days runaway
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @05:43PM (1 child)
Is the "Mueller Report" the TDS Bible now? The braying for the "unredacted report" sounds mighty like the Birthers back in the day chattering about the "long form birth certificate".
She lost, he won. Be an adult and quit your whining.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @07:34PM
She hasn't lost. He'll be calmer after she gelds him.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @12:30PM (6 children)
Not trolling - this is a legitimate question. Why is this considered a "First Amendment" issue? Assange is not a US citizen or resident, and he was not in the US when he allegedly committed these crimes. The US Constitution does not apply outside the US.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @12:38PM (4 children)
The US Constitution applies to the US Government. All actions that government takes must comply with it. Someone does not lose fundamental rights by not being a citizen, they must still be afforded those rights because it is the government's duty to abide by those restrictions.
(Score: 4, Informative) by jelizondo on Friday May 24 2019, @02:52PM (3 children)
Tell that to the people in Guantanamo, or U.S. citizens executed [aclu.org] without trial or people tortured [amnesty.org.uk] by CIA operatives.
Or try asserting your rights in the border [constitutioncenter.org], where apparently the U.S. government is not bound by law.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Friday May 24 2019, @03:29PM
There's philosophy and then there is practice. More and more, the Bill of Rights is just a pleasant bedtime story we tell ourselves to set aside the fears that we are living in a country where power is the only measure of legality.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday May 24 2019, @04:31PM (1 child)
Mostly true and well written. Except that the U.S. Government is indeed bound by law at the border, only what is and what is not permissible under law changes because there is a legitimate national security interest at the border. Which argument can be rejected if one feels that the Bill of Rights and other amendments are absolutes, although the courts have never agreed with such a notion [learner.org]. One may also make a case also that in time of War other priorities come into play (i.e. innocents killed by drone strikes are collateral damage of battle), although that cannot justify torture. The problem there being no actual War has been declared.
Overall I hope these charges are pressed to their fullest and that the government loses. The chilling effect that a win would have on journalism cannot be underestimated.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @05:49AM
The Supreme Court also approved of Japanese internment camps and other blatantly unconstitutional atrocities, though, so forgive me for being skeptical.
The government still has to follow the Constitution during times of war.
(Score: 2) by DeVilla on Sunday May 26 2019, @02:57AM
I would assume the Constitution would have to apply as much as any other US law the US is trying to enforce on a non-citizen/non-resident for a crime committed outside the US. So the grounds for enforcing the protections of the Constitution would be the same as the grounds for enforcing the laws he's being prosecuted for.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @12:46PM (2 children)
From the publication of record of the ICFI: New charges against Julian Assange under the Espionage Act criminalize journalism [wsws.org]:
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday May 24 2019, @01:56PM
Well, dude, you've made a helluva lot of those wswsws..... posts. For once, I have to agree with wsw...... Whatever else Assange may or may not be, he is a journalist, and he is covered under all the same rights, obligations, and freedoms that the publisher of any major newspaper is covered.
If all of the MSM doesn't come to Assange's defense, and work overtime to build that defense, things are going to get ugly. There really shouldn't be more than a small handful of idiots in Washington who are serious about prosecuting Assange. Unfortunately, we have an overabundance of idiots. "Well, yeah, we have Freedom of the Press! All of the press that we approve of are free to report anything they like - if they know what's good for them, they only like to report stuff we want reported!"
“I have become friends with many school shooters” - Tampon Tim Walz
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @08:15PM
fucking pigs
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @01:53PM (3 children)
Why do they not indict Putin as well?
Or Kim? Or various other heads of states and other VIPs who at some point have (tried to) spy on the US?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @03:30PM (2 children)
They have guns.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @05:55PM (1 child)
Nukes, even.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @06:14PM
And they write him letters; beautiful letters.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @01:54PM (5 children)
If they had waited for his extradition, , they could have more easily laid these charges plus ask for the death penalty.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Friday May 24 2019, @02:15PM (3 children)
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/may/24/assange-extradition-could-test-patience-of-australia-and-us-allies-bob-carr-warns [theguardian.com]
Incompetence? Looks like Sweden will get first swing at him.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @05:25PM (1 child)
You mean he will be convicted of Rape in Sweden? So will he get the mandatory 40 hours of community service?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Friday May 24 2019, @08:13PM
They'll sentence him to do it again, this time with a steel-reinforced condom.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @08:19PM
good thing trumpy is in office or the state socialist authoritarians wouldn't care about assaange's possible sentence.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday May 24 2019, @06:19PM
Most likely because the lawyers at DoJ (or the White House, or both) feel like arguing the conspiracy about hacking (of which Assange's lawyers would indeed argue) is too thin a reed to get him into the U.S. clutches.
From what I've read there's a possibility that Assange was just shining Manning on about being able to help hack the codes. Whether that reaches the threshhold of being an overt act [justia.com] is what could be arguable. Unless there is some proof that Assange then turned stuff over to "his guy" to help crack the codes (which appears to be the only overt act in furtherance of the crime) then I think there's probably grounds to protest that no conspiracy existed. Cops can lie.... so why can't journalists?
In passing, Donald Trump seems to be an expert at understanding what conspiracy is and isn't now.
That Assange did what he did quite stupidly, no doubt. But maybe something stronger is needed to force the extradition doors open.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @03:53PM (12 children)
Remember the context of all this: Trump's constant accusations that a free press is literally the enemy of the people.
Trump's MO is to say "Do you hate X? I hate X! You should support me and I will hurt X for you!" (and then he robs you blind while you are too busy cheering to notice)
Remember when he fired Comey and said it was because of how Comey was unfair to Hillary? Like all the democrats would cheer him for it?
He's doing the same thing here. Lots of people on the left are flaming fucking mad at Assange for the role he played in the attack on the 2016 elections. So he's the perfect guy for trump to go after in his first major attack on the free press. He's hoping that even if you won't defend Assange, you'll shrug and say, "eh, what do I care? That shit head deserves it." (remember Assange has not been charged for anything to do with 2016, this is only about the Manning leaks - charges that Obama's DoJ decided would be over the line)
And he does fucking deserve it. But the bigger picture here is that after establishing a precedent with Assange, trump's going to go after people who don't deserve it. Good, decent, hard-working Americans that have dedicated their lives to holding the powerful to account. Those people are the real target here.
We have to defend this shit head's rights in order to defend all those good people. It fucking sucks. But that's the choice we are facing right now.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @05:01PM (2 children)
Where are all those imbeciles who were apoplectic that Hillary supposedly made a private joke about droning Assange? Here's ya boy officially threatening Assange's life by charging him with crimes that could include a death sentence.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:22AM (1 child)
Crooked "joked" about Droning him, that's so true. And, she "joked" about Moammar/Libya. About the incredibly brutal way he was murdered (RIP!!). That one happened because of her. By the way, no Due Process there. ZERO.
My Justice Department, as you know has filed charges against this guy. Who, allegedly is one of the worst leakers, and hackers ever. We think he's been hacking, and leaking all over the place. So we're going through the Due Process with him. Trying to get him into our magnificent Justice System. And that one's the envy of the World. Trust me, we're doing it very fairly. He's going to get one of the fairest "trials" you've seen in you're entire life. Beautiful!!!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @12:41AM
Every post you make is a test of Poe's Law.
(Score: 2) by All Your Lawn Are Belong To Us on Friday May 24 2019, @06:09PM (2 children)
Nice dichotomy. Either Assange deserves to be prosecuted or he does not. Either what Assange did is espionage or it is not. You're trying to have your cake and eat it too.
By charging him with a crime which can invoke the death penalty they made it very much harder to get him extradited even by England (which would have to be assured that the death penalty would not be sought nor carried out) let alone Sweden. Given the President's stance on not liking to be pushed around I'm hoping he'd explicitly order that no such assurance be made.
This sig for rent.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @08:00PM
He absolutely deserves to be prosecuted. BUT NOT FOR THE ACTIONS HE'S BEEN CHARGED WITH.
Capiche?
Furthermore, he will not be charged for the actions that legitimately deserve prosecution, because shining a spotlight on those actions would be highly embarrassing to the authoritarians currently in power.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Friday May 24 2019, @09:19PM
The latest charges carry 10 years per charge. No death penalty.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1, Troll) by ElizabethGreene on Friday May 24 2019, @06:39PM (5 children)
This is incorrect. His accusation is that large swaths of the free press lie and uses their position of trust to deceive the people. The distinction is a subtle.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @07:57PM (4 children)
No, you are incorrect. While trump started off making statements with enough space for the willfully blind to find the kind of nuance you are attributing to him, he has since escalated to outright accusations that the press in general is the enemy of the people.
Here's one such tweet where he makes no such distinction, referring to the press at large: [twitter.com]
You know what's really insane though? The way the press has barely reported on those statements. Its like they are a deer stuck in trump's headlights. They are unequipped to deal with the crisis of authoritarianism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @08:25PM (3 children)
by "press" he means the media whores that are controlled by the same deep state scum that are trying to bring the US under complete NWO rule as another slave state and everyone knows who the fuck he's talking about. that's why the media whores don't repeat what he said b/c they are scared of what the people might do when they realize it's not just them that hates these disgusting pieces of shit on tv and at the major papers in california and new york. they're lucky they aren't all being burned alive and stabbed/shot when they go to lunch. free press, my ass
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday May 24 2019, @08:38PM (2 children)
You seem like a level-headed guy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @01:12AM (1 child)
Would that be level zero/flattened?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday May 25 2019, @10:53PM
says the go along to get along, tax paying, boot licking whore.