Posted on 04/11/2019 2:57:15 PM PDT by Steve1999
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has portrayed himself as a champion of a free press, but the U.S. Department of Justice’s decision to charge him with conspiring to hack government computers limits his ability to mount a vigorous free speech defense, some legal experts said.The charge unsealed in federal court in Alexandria, Virginia on Thursday said that in 2010 Assange agreed to help Chelsea Manning, a former U.S. Army intelligence analyst then known as Bradley Manning, crack a password to a U.S. government network. At the time, Manning had already given WikiLeaks classified information about U.S. war activities in both Afghanistan and Iraq, as well as Guantanamo Bay detainees, prosecutors said. The scheme would have allowed Manning to log in to the network anonymously and avoid detection, the indictment said.
(Excerpt) Read more at reuters.com ...
Conspiring a felony is not free speech. He received top secret material from “Chelsea”, urged him to commit more crimes and helped to break into DoD secret computer systems.
This is why they put Bradley into solitary for 2 weeks and put the screws to him.
The press does that all the time. Remember James Wolfe?
Is it a felony to reveal the name of a “covert” CIA agent?
The correct defense is that Assange is not a US citizen, and has never been on US soil. US laws do not apply to him.
And if they do, then the laws of the EU, and of China, and of Saudi Arabia apply to American citizens, even if they’ve never visited those countries.
I agree
He conspired with an US citizen to break into DoD computers and steal secret information. This is a crime against the USA. By your logic Bin Laden should have also gone free because he wasn’t a US citizen.
Exactly. So why is the media out to get Assange? Well, that’s obvious. What isn’t so obvious? The AG will give him a deal for his testimony before a grand jury on...FISAgate.
Ya’ll sit back and have some beer and popcorn.
-SB
Bin Laden killed people. The right to self defense exists, and can be enforced, even if no nation-states exist.
Assange violated no one’s rights.
Either you will be subject to the laws of Brunei and Pakistan even in cases where your actions violate no one’s rights, or you will defend Assange.
Your choice.
I don’t want him to go free. In 2010 we all wanted him to be thrown in jail for a long time and I see no reason to change my opinion. If anything the current indictment shows he has committed more crimes than we knew then.
So Chinese firms can freely steel the intellectual property of Americans in your world?
You support people hacking into our secure systems?
Indirectly. Binny handled a gun about as we as Al Gore. Leaking diplomatic cables and other materials to undermine a war in which we were involved gave the green light for Obama's premature withdrawal from Iraq and unleashing ISIS to massacre thousands upon thousands, precipitating a colossal refugee crisis .... just as the release of the Pentagon Papers by the scumbag Ellsberg undermined support for S. Vietnam to the benefit of the North and resulted in the murder and forced reeducation of thousands and the subsequent boat people exodus in which many more died.
The right to self defense exists, and can be enforced, even if no nation-states exist.
And what does that have to do with Assange?
Assange violated no one’s rights.
We don't know what the blowback was from all of his leaks but there's no way it could be without consequences for the world not to mention consequences for the poor dumb idealists who fell for his storyline.
They already do.
And unless there’s local Chinese law that makes it a crime, they can even do it legally. Nor would China permit its citizens to be extradited to the US for actions that are not illegal under Chinese law.
Logical fallacy, much?
I don’t support Sharia law, in spite of the fact I also don’t support extraditing people to the US whose actions under Sharia law are legal where those actions were performed, but illegal here.
None of that ethically or legally justifies prior restraint.
More to the point, if you commit a crime, you have no right to criminalize the exposure of that crime just because it damages you or others.
What those leaks exposed was CRIMINAL, under international law. What part of "CRIMINAL" is it that you fail to understand? And not just any crime, but murder in cold blood.
This is not a debatable point.
Me: The right to self defense exists, and can be enforced, even if no nation-states exist.
You: And what does that have to do with Assange?
An utterly dishonest response. The answer I gave was in reference to 9/11 and Bin Laden. The point was to explain why the fact that US law doesn't apply to foreigners was irrelevant to the actual murder or 3000 people on US soil.
You: We don't know what the blowback was from all of his leaks but there's no way it could be without consequences for the world not to mention consequences for the poor dumb idealists who fell for his storyline.
You are not responsible for the actions of others, even if your actions might enable them to commit evil acts. That's why gun control is wrong.
What others do in their own countries is less of a concern to me. Breaking into OUR computers, located on US soil, is a concern.
Manning was the one who actually did anything. Which was only possible because the disks were not encrypted. It’s the equivalent of having the password of the e-mail account of the US Secretary Of State be “PASSWD”.
Here are the “manners and means of the conspiracy” from the indictment. There are only four of them:
1) “It was part of the conspiracy that Assange and Manning used the ‘Jabber’ online chat service to collaborate…” THEY USED AN ENCRYPTED TEXTING APP TO COMMUNICATE
2) “Assange and Manning took measures to conceal Manning as the source of the disclosure of classified records to WikiLeaks, including by removing usernames from the disclosed information and deleting chat logs...” THEY FOLLOWED STANDARD INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM PROTOCOLS
3) “It was part of the conspiracy that Assange encouraged Manning to provide information and records from departments and agencies of the United States.” A JOURNALIST ASKED A SOURCE FOR MORE
And 4) “It was part of the conspiracy that Assange and Manning used a special folder on a cloud drop box of WikiLeaks to transmit classified records containing information related to the national defense of the United States.” THEY USED THE INTERWEBS
Additionally, Manning “copied a Linux operating system to a CD” HEAVEN FORBID and provided Assange with part of a password to a system she already had access to, and ask him to crack it. Assange was unable to do so (per the indictment itself.)
Assange did nothing wrong. And nothing illegal, per previous SCOTUS precedent, and per the prohibitions in the First Amendment.
Both assholes, but that is not against the law. The 1st amendment and precedents give very broad rights there.
Assange is not charged with being an asshole though. He is charged with conspiracy to break into US government’s secure computer. That is not protected by the 1st amendment.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.