51 ms·

The US Is Preparing to Prosecute Julian Assange

324 points by mises 8y ago

coding123 8y ago
https://outline.com/qGn9gA https://outline.com/qGn9gA
gbumakefan 8y ago
Wow. Freedom of the press is dead.
- ixtli 8y ago
  The reason we try to uphold freedom of the press isn't to defend people like this or their actions. It always seems pretty clearly bad faith when people make this argument about Assange.
  - kjksf 8y ago
    So far all we know that US is preparing to prosecute Assange for something. We don't know what that something is so you're jumping to a big conclusion that it has something to do with vague "freedom of the press". Freedom of press is about things like "government can't interfere with publishing of information through prior restraint" etc. Freedom of press doesn't provide immunity from crimes. We can table "freedom of press" discussion until we know what exactly US is accusing Assange of.
    - ixtli 8y ago
      I agree with this. Idk if you meant to reply to the parent.
- midniteslayr 8y ago
  I don't think Freedom of the Press is dead. WikiLeaks isn't a news organization, especially when they released campaign emails during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. They have been to be a known tool for the Russian government, even going as far as creating a show for Julian Assange on the state-backed RT TV Network.
  - implying 8y ago
    If a "credible" (read: state-approved) news organization had released those emails, would you have the same thoughts toward them?
    - hadrien01 8y ago
      News organizations wouldn't drop all the emails at once. Previous enormous leaks have been handled by ICIJ members with great care, going for years of investigations, careful verifications, and publishing only pertinent stories.
      - pknopf 8y ago
        But there was an election around the corner, they can't be bothered with any of that.
      - thaumasiotes 8y ago
        Why is that better than releasing all the emails at once? Why do they get to decide what's "pertinent"?
        1001101 8y ago
        I wonder if how Julian releases the primary source material is in line with his scientific journalism [1] practices. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_journalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_journalism
        kbenson 8y ago
        For the same reason that if you found yourself with access to someone's diary that you thought might be guilty of wrongdoing, you might convince yourself to look through it possibly with a lawyer friend and report on if anything illegal went on, but you might shy away from publishing the whole thing online "just in case". One option at least pays lip service to legal and ethical considerations.
        hackinthebochs 8y ago
- astronautjones 8y ago
  that's hyperbolic. freedom of the press while aggressively taunting/sovereign citizen-ing the most overpowered executive power in the world, maybe
- thoughtexplorer 8y ago
  N'ah. To check for yourself, watch CNN and Fox News side by side to see the range of freedom that the press has.
- empath75 8y ago
  They gave that up when they became a cutout for Russian intelligence. They’ve been an asset for Putin since he walked into the embassy.
  - aglavine 8y ago
    This. Probably before that.
Apocryphon 8y ago
So much for WikiLeaks thinking there was a lesser evil back in 2016
- visibly-visible 8y ago
  The HN comment section is turning into Reddit
  - root_axis 8y ago
    It's uniquely HN to condescend by using another website as an insult.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
  - Apocryphon 8y ago
    Because it’s become politicized? Well, tech has become incredibly politicized in the last few years. And Assange and WikiLeaks are both political and have played politics.
- a10022 8y ago
  Long shot: You need to be prosecuted, otherwise you cannot be pardoned.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - javagram 8y ago
    This is not true at all. See, e.g. the blanket pardon given to draft dodgers after the Vietnam War.
  - vkou 8y ago
    Does this explain why US presidents give retroactive pardons for their political friends, like it was Halloween candy?
minikites 8y ago
I would be genuinely surprised if the current administration decided to prosecute one of their most useful Russian agents.
- kbenson 8y ago
  Setting aside whether I think it's likely Assange is a Russian agent, it wouldn't surprise me to see an agent of a nation thrown under the bus for political reasons or to support a narrative. For an example, see Valerie Plame. Fun fact, as I was looking this up to make sure I had the right people and names, wikipedia helpfully informed me that "The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Trump in 2018." More fuel for the conspiracy minded, I guess. ;)
- ixtli 8y ago
  Again sarcasm as a way to convey a legitimate point is downvoted on HN so I'll translate: I would be surprised if he was prosecuted harshly given his important role in the election of the current president of the US. (Edit: to be clear, I personally dislike seeing all these jokes about russian agents re: the 2016 election. There was clearly meddling but its beginning to bother me that a vocal strain of vocal American liberals seem to believe that the main reason why trump is president is because someone broke some rules. People like Assange aren't pawns of some dark and evil power: they are themselves bad actors and should be treated as such.)
  - ixtli 8y ago
    I'd also like to point out that, while I really value this community I dislike this tendency. Not agreeing with such comments is fine, but this isn't a personal attack so I don't understand why this style of conversation is treated this way. Sarcasm and sly humor are actually good and should be encouraged so long as it is relevant and not meant to hurt non-public figures. Overall this behavior comes off to me as understanding what is being conveyed but using the style of delivery as an excuse not to engage.
  - 8y ago
londons_explore 8y ago
If true, this suggests that previous articles about assange being 'practically free to go', and 'just staying in the embassy for attention' were misinformed.
- slededit 8y ago
  Yea but nobody remembers those.
  - wallace_f 8y ago
    Like the Iraq Warlogs, or DWS scandal. Even leaks like the Stratfor files are certainly in the best interests of the "little guy," if anyone actually gives a shit about them. But if "all a man is, is what others say of him," then by watching the news, Assange is just a Russian agent.
    - xster 8y ago
      But how could you 'remember' the DWS scandal if WikiLeaks were illegal to read :D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-beYBLrkNAg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-beYBLrkNAg
    - thanosnose 8y ago
      > But if "all a man is, is what others say of him," then by watching the news, Assange is just a Russian agent. One of the most interesting aspect of the assange story is how the news industry celebrated assange in the early part of the 2010s and then started to demonize him in the past few years. It was all so sudden as if someone flipped a switch and everyone got on the same message. It's also interesting how sexual assault accusations were used to take down assange just like it was used for kavanaugh.
      - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
        W trained the press not to ask hard questions and keep to the provided script.
patrioticaction 8y ago
It's been a real treat to watch Russia wag the dog over the last fifteen years as they've over-inflated nascent or waning American institutions to produce one final product of political capitulation (e.g. The Tea Party, NRA, Libertarian Party, Green Party, and most recently, the Republican Party)
- 2RTZZSro 8y ago
  Obesity and celebrity worship are far greater threats to US national security than "Russia"
  - komali2 8y ago
    And yet the United States still sends troops to the middle East again and again and again. The greatest threat to an American life is a drunk driver. If the United States actually had priorities aligned with statistical reality, the billions poured into the war on {{concept}} would have been redirected to drunk driving decades ago. Also, smoking would be illegal.
    - 2RTZZSro 8y ago
      Regarding wars in the middle east. US foreign policy is at the mercy of the revolving door of the military industrial complex, spearheaded by Israeli dual citizens and Zionist sympathizers (many Christians) which represent Americans in Congress. Many accuse of Israel of having a "Greater Israel" project which is identical in nature to the German Nazi "Lebensraum" in its geopolitical and racial objectives. AIPAC to Deploy Hundreds of Lobbyists to Push for Syria Action Pro-Israel lobby says 250 activists will meet with their senators and representatives in Washington in a bid to win support Congressional support for military action in Syria. https://www.haaretz.com/aipac-pushing-hard-for-syria-action-1.5330700 https://www.haaretz.com/aipac-pushing-hard-for-syria-action-... http://archive.is/UWcvh http://archive.is/UWcvh US Jewish lobby challenged by 'pro-peace' rival The most powerful Jewish lobby in America is facing an unprecedented threat from a rival pro-peace pressure group that is vying for the ear of President Barack Obama. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/5178883/US-Jewish-lobby-challenged-by-pro-peace-rival.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel... http://archive.is/kDcM0 http://archive.is/kDcM0 The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy: Expanding on their notorious 2006 article in the London Review of Books, the authors increase the megatonnage of their explosive claims about the malign influence of the pro-Israel lobby on the U.S. government. Mearsheimer and Walt, political scientists at the University of Chicago and Harvard, respectively, survey a wide coalition of pro-Israel groups and individuals, including American Jewish organizations and political donors, Christian fundamentalists, neo-con officials in the executive branch, media pundits who smear critics of Israel as anti-Semites and the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, which they characterize as having an almost unchallenged hold on Congress. This lobby, they contend, has pressured the U.S. government into Middle East policies that are strategically and morally unjustifiable: lavish financial subsidies for Israel despite its occupation of Palestinian territories; needless American confrontations with Israel's foes Syria and Iran; uncritical support of Israel's 2006 bombing of Lebanon, which violated the laws of war; and the Iraq war, which almost certainly would not have occurred had [the Israel lobby] been absent. The authors disavow conspiracy mongering, noting that the lobby's activities constitute legitimate, if misguided, interest-group politics, as American as apple pie. Considering the authors' academic credentials and the careful reasoning and meticulous documentation with which they support their claims, the book is bound to rekindle the controversy. https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374531501 https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/03...
paulpauper 8y ago
I never thought it would happen. He always seemed to stay a few steps ahead and he has plenty of of supporters and many countries that are hostile the US were willing to grant him asylum. I'm not sure how this would work. He would have to be kidnapped or given up.
- tootie 8y ago
  He has successfully alienated anyone who ever supported him at this point.
  - jMyles 8y ago
    Not me. I still think that his efforts have cast very important light on the recent history of US Foreign Policy.
    - tootie 8y ago
      Assange is simply not an honest broker which is his one job. Even if you think the Chelsea Manning leak was valuable, what exactly was Assange's value add? The leaker was not protected. She was caught and prosecuted. The data was not protected. WikiLeaks was hacked and leaked all the raw data. The content was not shared in an objective way. Assange editorialized the content with his own opinions (ie Collateral Murder). His only contribution was to raise money to pay for hosting. There's a reason why Ed Snowden didn't give his leaks to Assange.
      - jMyles 8y ago
        If this sort of assessment is the case against Assange (in terms of his character as a journalist), then I think he has a very strong case. > The leaker was not protected. She was caught and prosecuted. You're talking as if Assange or WikiLeaks disclosed the source. Are you suggesting that a journalist has a responsibility to protect a source unto the ends of the earth, even when that source openly and flatly confides in an (in retrospect, untrustworthy) friend that she has leaked what she knows to be classified material? How exactly was Wikileaks supposed to respond? By somehow tracking down Adrian Lamo and ensuring that he didn't report her? I'm just astonished at this part of your indictment. > The data was not protected. WikiLeaks was hacked and leaked all the raw data. "Hacked?" WikiLeaks published the entire cache of documents - and I celebrate them for it. I have personally read over 600 pages (probably a thousand at this point) and I have yet to encounter one of them that I, as a United States citizen, believe was rightly withheld from my view by my government. WikiLeaks took care to redact some proper nouns from these documents, but provided unredacted versions to some journalists, along with painstaking, easy-to-follow instructions about preserving them. Nevertheless, a (much more ostensible respectable) journalist at The Guardian posted the passphrase and the files were leaked. In what universe is this a failing of WikiLeaks OpsSec? "Hacked"? What can you possibly be talking about? The only security compromise about which I'm aware on the part of WikiLeaks was a problem with their web frontend which briefly allowed a group to change it to a juvenile message. No documents were involved. > The content was not shared in an objective way. Assange editorialized the content with his own opinions (ie Collateral Murder). ...so? What's wrong with that? Let's keep things in perspective here: a person flying in a helicopter intentionally fired an explosive missile at a person standing on the ground. I know we're all pretty numb to this happening at this point, but I think it's still pretty shocking when you think about it. Maybe he did think that he was firing on someone carrying an RPG. So? It's still a crazy act, carried out during an illegal war. Calling it "Collateral Murder" doesn't turn me off in the slightest. > There's a reason why Ed Snowden didn't give his leaks to Assange. I appreciate the way that Ed Snowden conducted himself. He took a different approach and one that is welcome. I also think that Ed Snowden's criticisms of WikiLeaks are substantially more honest than yours. Can you explain why you've characterized these things in such a strange way?
xoa 8y ago
Without any opinion the merits of this case in particular, which seems like a total mess all around and I haven't been following, on the topic more generally I found "Demystifying International Extradition" [1] last year to be an interesting summary of the process. It introduced me to concepts that don't really tend to come up in local law. Amongst other pertinent aspects is that while the US generally wants to avoid binding its own hands it can do so if another nation demands it when it comes to the penalties it will seek. Lots of countries (I think including England?) will not extradite if the death penalty is on the table, but the US can apparently legally assure that it won't seek it (for capital crimes). Lot of political considerations and such in high profile cases I guess when it comes to agreements between nation-states. Everyone can be prickly about their prerogatives and who gets justice and what it means for relations and public opinion and so on. Nothing guaranteed about it. ---- 1: https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/publications/2017/01/demystifying-international-extradition https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/publications/20...
- braythwayt 8y ago
  This has come up between the US and Canada. When the US seeks extradition for a capital crime, Canada nearly always asks for assurances that the US will not seek the death penalty.
- monocasa 8y ago
  There's also just straight up extraordinary rendition, ie. showing up, black bagging someone, and flying off, outside the legal process. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition Ironically, the UK doesn't allow extraordinary rendition, and it was a big deal to even let those planes refuel or use UK airspace, but Sweden historically has allowed it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Ahmed_Agiza_and_Muhammad_al-Zery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Ahmed_Agiza_an...
  - jacobush 8y ago
    It was made a big deal in Sweden how ridiculous any fears were that Assange could be extradited from Sweden to the US if he would go to Sweden for hearings. And now...
2RTZZSro 8y ago
Julian Assange was a key figure in the early days of PostgreSQL and he contributed to NetBSD http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/tcp_subr.c?rev=1.79&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=MAIN http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/tcp_subr... https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALtFtELs3mMM2g__fZFyFiT7u3zX1e8PevEiD5Lt920nuGjUyQ@mail.gmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALtFtELs3mMM2g__fZFyF...
- anarazel 8y ago
  "key figure" as in: A few small changes. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=author&s=julian https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=search... https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=72f76d38eb23e1fbca92f0e14b257c33e5ecccbc https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit... Edit: Added the one contribution he didn't commit himself.
  - Myrmornis 8y ago
    What? I would be proud to have got this into postgres core, but perhaps you operate on a different plane of excellence. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdiff;f=src/bin/psql/psql.c;h=4bb783f564705f592c94cd0122929f2eda01b20c;hp=2201c064269404d2b10602fd4278d28e82bd3243;hb=76bc8cb97fc35673c42fe84fe6a9d6887260419a;hpb=23c7ff0b3c38657081590430d08ef48bb5bde759 https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdi...
    - anarazel 8y ago
      > What? I would be proud to have got this into postgres core, but perhaps you operate on a different plane of excellence. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdi.. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdi.... It's just a minor rewrite of parts of the commandline client. Mostly made verbose by by renaming structs members / moving members around. 22+ years ago. > but perhaps you operate on a different plane of excellence. I work on PG close to full-time. So I sure hope I've many more contributions than that ;)
resters 8y ago
By doing this the US is coming to the aid of the many dictators and despots whose crimes Assange has helped reveal. Also, by ignoring the crimes revealed by the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs, the US makes it very clear that war-making cronies rule both parties and would never hold each other accountable for anything. To be clear, the war logs revealed that the US classified information solely because it revealed that the official narrative about why we were involved in those wars was false. Regardless of what one thinks about Assange, it's pretty hard to argue that the crimes revealed by the war logs aren't highly worrisome. Regardless of how one feels about Assange, it's hard to deny that WL was the most successful attempt by any journalist to unmask the widespread US war crimes that we've seen in many decades. My statement above may be too strong... so be it, but surely a court should have been able to decide the fate of the propagandists who misused their power to classify information from the American people. Instead the war criminals just attacked Assange and everyone else including most journalists do as they are asked and turned on a fellow journalist who was willing to sacrifice his freedom for the cause of truth.
- StavrosK 8y ago
  > the US is coming to the aid of the many dictators and despots whose crimes Assange has helped reveal. I.e. themselves.
  - aglavine 8y ago
    You realize he may be a Russian spy, don't you?
    - StavrosK 8y ago
      Does that excuse the war crimes that were committed?
      - darawk 8y ago
        No, but do the war crimes the US committed mean that Assange is not guilty of being a Russian asset?
StanislavPetrov 8y ago
In an ideal world, this wouldn't be a bad thing. A trial would force the government to finally show us proof that Wikileaks was working for the Russians and they conspired criminally to hack US networks. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world, and you should be absolutely certain that any "trial" Assange gets will be a kangaroo court where he is convicted on "secret" evidence that we won't be able to independently view or scrutinize due to "national security concerns". What's worse is people will point to Assange's conviction in this show trial as proof of all of evidence-free accusations the spy agencies and US government have been hurling around for the last 2+ years.
- intralizee 8y ago
  I agree, I'm surprised you're being downvoted for this opinion. Kangaroo courts happen and even when the person facing the verdict is high profile. It shows how power with the agenda of whomever is what crafts law. Logic is the thing rational people cling to and logic is not part of foundation making justice in prosecutions. The wild thing to me is how much hate assange has gathered recently online. People seem to prefer writing just throw him in jail than take the undecided stance. Makes me think things are getting worse if you're on the not happy side with how things are run.
  - StanislavPetrov 8y ago
    Its being downvoted for the same reason that Assange is so hated. Unfortunately most Americans are incredibly susceptible to propaganda. Its why 90% of Americans continued to believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11 even years after the invasion of Iraq. Even for those few Americans with the capacity to be skeptical and think critically, its much easier to accept "conventional wisdom" and adopt the official narrative than to consider the possibility that our government regularly disseminates lies and propaganda. Groupthink is not only real, it is perhaps the dominant driving force in society.
Myrmornis 8y ago
If true then disgusting and completely unacceptable. The way in which legal systems have been cynically abused to ruin this man's life reflects extremely poorly on the people and institutions concerned. Wikileaks' revelation of the disgusting behavior of the US armed forces in Baghdad was an extremely valuable contribution to society.
- TheLilHipster 8y ago
  The claims of him being a russian asset and the the links to washingtonpost and nytimes as credible sources in this thread is hilarious. I thought hacker news was more rational and logical than my twitter feed - maybe not. Assange and WL is the last bastion of free speech and genuine joirnalism left in our modern age. If you dont see that, then youre a fool.
  - topmonk 8y ago
    Also, being a "Russian asset", whatever that means, doesn't affect anything. If he refuses to release dirt against Russia, the would be leaker can go to someone else or just release it themselves. He isn't the gatekeeper of all leaked information. Justifying it this way is just a ploy to punish the whistleblower and I can't believe how many people go along with it.
plugger 8y ago
long hair don't care.
anoncoward111 8y ago
[clears throat] USA killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civillians and is now jailing the whistleblowers [cough]
- armenarmen 8y ago
  Americans (and I sadly speak for all 300mm+ of us) no longer give a flying fuck about illegal wars or mass murder. There is no peace movement, there won’t be ever again. Citizens will ignore the wars and entertain them selves by rage posting about either the red or blue team
  - anoncoward111 8y ago
    I care a lot about the genocide and illegal wars :( I've written online under my real name and fake names, I've done deep original research, some of it gets fairly decent traction. I think we all actually are legitimately powerless to stop the war machine and the majority of Americans who actually support it... so the rest of us are lost to apathy.
    - armenarmen 8y ago
      Good on you. I hope it takes. And yeah, I believe that we are legit powerless to do anything about it. No party is a peace/non-intervention party. I don’t think that most Americans support the war aspect of the machine. It’s apathy for some and learned helplessness for others.
      - mrleinad 8y ago
        Hey, if Assange/Snowden had ever believed they were powerless, we wouldn't be talking about them. Same goes for countless other figures throughout history. It's up to us who believe something else to convince more people and achieve critical mass, which will make the difference.
        jacobush 8y ago
kuwze 8y ago
If he had kept his promise after Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning I would care.
- jMyles 8y ago
  What a silly point on which to turn your concerns about government misconduct, especially when it involves the 1st amendment. > Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning First of all, that never happened. You are drastically exaggerating the relief offered by the government. The government tortured this person for years and then, even after offering this (in the great scheme of things, small) gesture of commuting her sentence, it still kept her locked up for an absurd amount of time, ostensibly for administrative reasons. It was too little too late for me, and too little too late for Assange. If the government wanted to take the deal he offered, it had the opportunity to immediately pardon Manning and call Assange out on it. Then we'd know if he was bluffing. This (less than) half measure doesn't cut.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
    > ostensibly for administrative reasons Manning took an oath to keep secrets and violated that oath fully understanding that it can lead to incarceration.
  - sigmar 8y ago
    >It was too little too late for me, and too little too late for Assange. If the government wanted to take the deal he offered, it had the opportunity to immediately pardon Manning and call Assange out on it. Then we'd know if he was bluffing. This (less than) half measure doesn't cut. What? Assange asked for clemency. "If Obama grants Manning clemency Assange will agree to US extradition despite clear unconstitutionality of DoJ case". and I'm not sure how it was "too little too tale for Assange" since it was days after that that Obama granted clemency. Also- you seem to care so much for Manning that you went the extra mile to avoid using her preferred pronouns by using "this person." Amazing.
CryptoPunk 8y ago
What someone's motivation is (in relation to the still unsubstantiated allegation that Assange is a "Russian asset" trying advance Russian foreign policy objectives) should be completely irrelevant to the legality of an action. Is publishing leaked documents protected under the First Amendment? Is publishing "propaganda" protected under the First Amendment? I would say the answer to both of these questions is yes.
- onetimemanytime 8y ago
  All these questions his attorneys can try to answer during the trial. That he was /is a Russian asset, I think we pretty much know. Maybe he needed a bear hug in light of everyone behind against him...or maybe Russia had dirt on the country he wanted to hurt?
  - CryptoPunk 8y ago
    I see this claim a lot, yet no evidence to substantiate it. What evidence do you have that he is/was a Russian asset? And what does it matter if it's a Russian asset doing the leaking, instead of a selfless journalist? Is the leaking illegal or not? This "Russian asset" angle seems like ad hominem to make people acquiesce to violating freedom of speech.
    - onetimemanytime 8y ago
      CIA Director: 'It's time to call out Wikileaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.' It's normal for us not to have any direct evidence, but to see the results of their behavior. CIA on the other hand might have recordings, communication etc. They have been digging for years.
      - CryptoPunk 8y ago
        An organization dedicated to publishing leaked documented can be "abetted" by any number of intelligence agencies by the nature of its function. That doesn't make it an asset of any intelligence agency.
oh_sigh 8y ago
Who are these people who are 'familiar with the matter'? Look at the people 'familiar with the matter' regarding the apple/et al spy chip story. How can we, as consumers of news, ever know if there is any kind of truth from these anonymous sources, or if they are just trying to nudge either public perception, or key players(wikileaks, ecuador, etc) in a certain way?
- frankharv 8y ago
  I just bough a Quanta LGA2011 board off ebay. In the BIOS PXE settings were IP's that belong to Amazon. So I have to wonder if Amazon even used SuperMicro hardware. I know with great certainty that they used Quanta as a board manufacturer. So who planted this story is my question. Who would stand the most at bringing down SuperMicro. I would rule out the Chinese because they were made to look bad. So who else in the US manufactures motherboards and would benefit from SuperMicro's demise. Did the same people also drive SuperMicro stock down to a point of it being delisted? I hated seeing a "Designed in the USA" motherboard manufacturer dragged through the mud. I have used their affordable dual CPU motherboards dating back to BX chipset. Ultra-reliable and feature packed. I even made some negative Supermicro comments at the time. Amazing how easily even intelligent people can be brainwashed. The problem with the story is that all of the accusations are technically feasible. We know TAO does this from Edward Snowdens wonderful truthfulness. So we all wanted to have an Ahh-Ha moment. Too bad we were duped.
liveoneggs 8y ago
fun fact: Julian Assange was an early NetBSD developer. Long live proff@ ;)
nl 8y ago
What are the planned charges likely to be for? My understanding is that the original leaks were likely to be difficult to win a case over. His actions during the 2016 election campaign maybe a different story though. It's unclear exactly what he is alleged to have done.
bigbluedots 8y ago
I wonder if the espionage act will suffice, or whether they'll need to make up some new laws here?
scythe 8y ago
How do they plan to get him out of the embassy without violating the Vienna Convention? He's been amazingly... immature and disruptive... in the embassy, but has there ever in history been a case of a refugee being remanded to their oppressor because of how annoying they are? To be fair, Assange seems to be really annoying.
auslander 8y ago
Assange should hand the site over to Anonymous, just in case.
tempz 8y ago
It's elementary, my dear Watson: 1. WL disclosed information to US population. 2. WL is accused of being "Non-state Hostile Intelligence Service". 3. Hostile intelligence services work for enemies. 4. US population is the enemy.
sjg007 8y ago
I hope and pray that some smart lawyers come to his defense in both in England, Ecuador, and the USA. I hope that "we" are collectively smart enough to support him (and Snowden). He is probably not a Russian agent... all of that talk is a distraction (especially with Mueller).. if Russia left him out to dry then they would seriously curtail their intelligence operations... after all memes and fake news are far more effective. If he is a Russian agent, the Prisoners Dilemma applies: Will Trump pardon or will Russia declare? Russia has more to lose here. Maybe there is a way out for Russia and the US but I doubt it. This is actually an interesting case.. a 3 party prisoners dilemma.. any ideas? One of my biggest regrets is not supporting Aaron.. at the time it would not have been much but maybe collectively and everyone together. Maybe we were too late to recognize that he was ahead of his time... and maybe we still are. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484
- 0x8BADF00D 8y ago
  AIPAC will never let that stand. Human rights are okay, as long as those countries are either neutral or allied with Israel.
- FireBeyond 8y ago
  Why so? He has shown himself over time to be someone who has constantly reneged on his responsibilities, made obtuse efforts to be "understanding" when he has no standing ("offering" to be interviewed via video from the embassy - who else gets to decide how, when, where and if they are interviewed on criminal charges?), and shown himself to be entirely partisan in his motives when it comes down to it. Why should "we" be "collectively supporting him", precisely?
  - sjg007 8y ago
    What exactly is partisan?
    - FireBeyond 8y ago
      Contrived and controlled releases to influence a narrative in a particular desired direction. Being given a trove of documents categorized as misdeeds by both sides of government and largely sitting on those by one side, and releasing those that adversely impact the other. Partisan.
bbunix 8y ago
2 words: Jury Nullification. "Jury nullification occurs when a trial jury reaches a verdict that is contrary to the letter of the law because the jurors either: * disagree with the law under which the defendant is prosecuted, or * believe that the law shouldn’t be applied in the case at hand." https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-jury-nullification.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-jury-nullificat...
anarazel 8y ago
Looks like it already happened a few months back. Earlier today Seamus Hughes noticed an apparent copy&paste mistake in an independent court filing: https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/1063232297674162176 https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/1063232297674162176 Which the WaPo just corroborated: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/julian-assange-has-been-charged-prosecutors-reveal-in-inadvertent-court-filing/2018/11/15/9902e6ba-98bd-48df-b447-3e2a4638f05a_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/julia...
amanaplanacanal 8y ago
I can't read the article. Does it mention what charges might apply? If he conspired with the hackers, I can see where criminal charges might come in. If he merely published documents afterwards, I'm not sure what they could charge him with.
codedokode 8y ago
As I understand, Assange is not an US citizen. How can they prosecute him? Wikipedia page [1] says: > Opinions of Assange at this time [2010] were divided. Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard described his activities as "illegal," but the police said that he had broken no Australian law. United States Vice President Joe Biden and others called him a "terrorist". Some called for his assassination or execution. That's ridiculous. American soldiers killing civilians are "good guys", and Assange is a terrorist? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange
- lazyasciiart 8y ago
  Citizenship isn't usually relevant to prosecution, unless it's for something like treason. The US prosecutes foreigners for hacking crimes committed outside of the country as well.
  - codedokode 8y ago
    This is bad. Because other countries might take the same approach. What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? Like critisizing Communist Party? I don't see the difference between US prosecuting Assange and China prosecuting those who, being infinitely malignant, publish illegal, misleading information about Communist Party or Tiananmen square events thus bringing the authority and good name of the Government into contempt.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Because other countries might take the same approach They do. > What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? They...do. Well, not necessarily posts on the internet specifically, but... And, in some cases, not just the “appear before a court with counsel to answer charges with some simulation of due process” way of addressing crimes against their laws. Consider, e.g., the fatwa against the author, editors, and publishers of The Satanic Verses, whose targets were neither Iranian citizens nor operating in Iran.
parrellel 8y ago
Well, it only took ~7ish years, and two more character assassinations, but in the end they're going to get him, as expected. Profoundly unfortunate.
surfingtheweb 8y ago
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-cyberwar-commentary-idUSKBN12X075 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-cyberwar-commentar... "...Vice President Joe Biden said on NBC’s Meet the Press that “we’re sending a message” to Putin and “it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact.” When asked if the American public would know a message was sent, Biden replied, “Hope not.” This statement has haunted me since I first watched Biden's interview in 2016. What are Biden's plans to avenge Clinton's lost campaign? I've always thought it has something to do with Assange, but aside from discretely murdering Assange, I can't think of anything the US could do to avenge Hilary's loss that the public wouldn't know about. Clinton asked why we couldn't just drone Assange. Maybe they'll make his death look like an accident or a health issue?
qume 8y ago
There is a real, if small, chance that there could be a general election in the UK soon and potentially a more favourable labour government. If I were Assange I would do whatever I could to hang in there at least long enough to rule that possibility out.
throw2016 8y ago
Let's leave all the war criminals from Iraq so we have repeats in Libya and Syria. Let's forgot about the bankers and fraud. Let's not do anything about the NSA and liars like Clapper. Let's instead get Assange. This makes a lot of sense, but only if you are a pretend democracy. That should read the US regime is preparing to 'persecute' Julian Assange and should be a reality check for anyone remotely concerned about democracy, free press and dissent.

324 points by mises 8y ago

coding123 8y ago

https://outline.com/qGn9gA https://outline.com/qGn9gA

gbumakefan 8y ago

Wow. Freedom of the press is dead.

ixtli 8y ago
The reason we try to uphold freedom of the press isn't to defend people like this or their actions. It always seems pretty clearly bad faith when people make this argument about Assange.
- kjksf 8y ago
  So far all we know that US is preparing to prosecute Assange for something. We don't know what that something is so you're jumping to a big conclusion that it has something to do with vague "freedom of the press". Freedom of press is about things like "government can't interfere with publishing of information through prior restraint" etc. Freedom of press doesn't provide immunity from crimes. We can table "freedom of press" discussion until we know what exactly US is accusing Assange of.
  - ixtli 8y ago
    I agree with this. Idk if you meant to reply to the parent.
midniteslayr 8y ago
I don't think Freedom of the Press is dead. WikiLeaks isn't a news organization, especially when they released campaign emails during the 2016 U.S. Presidential Election. They have been to be a known tool for the Russian government, even going as far as creating a show for Julian Assange on the state-backed RT TV Network.
- implying 8y ago
  If a "credible" (read: state-approved) news organization had released those emails, would you have the same thoughts toward them?
  - hadrien01 8y ago
    News organizations wouldn't drop all the emails at once. Previous enormous leaks have been handled by ICIJ members with great care, going for years of investigations, careful verifications, and publishing only pertinent stories.
    - pknopf 8y ago
      But there was an election around the corner, they can't be bothered with any of that.
    - thaumasiotes 8y ago
      Why is that better than releasing all the emails at once? Why do they get to decide what's "pertinent"?
      - 1001101 8y ago
        I wonder if how Julian releases the primary source material is in line with his scientific journalism [1] practices. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_journalism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_journalism
      - kbenson 8y ago
        For the same reason that if you found yourself with access to someone's diary that you thought might be guilty of wrongdoing, you might convince yourself to look through it possibly with a lawyer friend and report on if anything illegal went on, but you might shy away from publishing the whole thing online "just in case". One option at least pays lip service to legal and ethical considerations.
      - hackinthebochs 8y ago
astronautjones 8y ago
that's hyperbolic. freedom of the press while aggressively taunting/sovereign citizen-ing the most overpowered executive power in the world, maybe
thoughtexplorer 8y ago
N'ah. To check for yourself, watch CNN and Fox News side by side to see the range of freedom that the press has.
empath75 8y ago
They gave that up when they became a cutout for Russian intelligence. They’ve been an asset for Putin since he walked into the embassy.
- aglavine 8y ago
  This. Probably before that.

Apocryphon 8y ago

So much for WikiLeaks thinking there was a lesser evil back in 2016

visibly-visible 8y ago
The HN comment section is turning into Reddit
- root_axis 8y ago
  It's uniquely HN to condescend by using another website as an insult.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
- Apocryphon 8y ago
  Because it’s become politicized? Well, tech has become incredibly politicized in the last few years. And Assange and WikiLeaks are both political and have played politics.
a10022 8y ago
Long shot: You need to be prosecuted, otherwise you cannot be pardoned.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- javagram 8y ago
  This is not true at all. See, e.g. the blanket pardon given to draft dodgers after the Vietnam War.
- vkou 8y ago
  Does this explain why US presidents give retroactive pardons for their political friends, like it was Halloween candy?

minikites 8y ago

I would be genuinely surprised if the current administration decided to prosecute one of their most useful Russian agents.

kbenson 8y ago
Setting aside whether I think it's likely Assange is a Russian agent, it wouldn't surprise me to see an agent of a nation thrown under the bus for political reasons or to support a narrative. For an example, see Valerie Plame. Fun fact, as I was looking this up to make sure I had the right people and names, wikipedia helpfully informed me that "The scandal led to a criminal investigation; no one was charged for the leak itself. Scooter Libby was convicted of lying to investigators. His prison sentence was ultimately commuted by President Bush, and he was pardoned by President Trump in 2018." More fuel for the conspiracy minded, I guess. ;)
ixtli 8y ago
Again sarcasm as a way to convey a legitimate point is downvoted on HN so I'll translate: I would be surprised if he was prosecuted harshly given his important role in the election of the current president of the US. (Edit: to be clear, I personally dislike seeing all these jokes about russian agents re: the 2016 election. There was clearly meddling but its beginning to bother me that a vocal strain of vocal American liberals seem to believe that the main reason why trump is president is because someone broke some rules. People like Assange aren't pawns of some dark and evil power: they are themselves bad actors and should be treated as such.)
- ixtli 8y ago
  I'd also like to point out that, while I really value this community I dislike this tendency. Not agreeing with such comments is fine, but this isn't a personal attack so I don't understand why this style of conversation is treated this way. Sarcasm and sly humor are actually good and should be encouraged so long as it is relevant and not meant to hurt non-public figures. Overall this behavior comes off to me as understanding what is being conveyed but using the style of delivery as an excuse not to engage.
- 8y ago

londons_explore 8y ago

If true, this suggests that previous articles about assange being 'practically free to go', and 'just staying in the embassy for attention' were misinformed.

slededit 8y ago
Yea but nobody remembers those.
- wallace_f 8y ago
  Like the Iraq Warlogs, or DWS scandal. Even leaks like the Stratfor files are certainly in the best interests of the "little guy," if anyone actually gives a shit about them. But if "all a man is, is what others say of him," then by watching the news, Assange is just a Russian agent.
  - xster 8y ago
    But how could you 'remember' the DWS scandal if WikiLeaks were illegal to read :D https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-beYBLrkNAg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-beYBLrkNAg
  - thanosnose 8y ago
    > But if "all a man is, is what others say of him," then by watching the news, Assange is just a Russian agent. One of the most interesting aspect of the assange story is how the news industry celebrated assange in the early part of the 2010s and then started to demonize him in the past few years. It was all so sudden as if someone flipped a switch and everyone got on the same message. It's also interesting how sexual assault accusations were used to take down assange just like it was used for kavanaugh.
    - kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
      W trained the press not to ask hard questions and keep to the provided script.

patrioticaction 8y ago

It's been a real treat to watch Russia wag the dog over the last fifteen years as they've over-inflated nascent or waning American institutions to produce one final product of political capitulation (e.g. The Tea Party, NRA, Libertarian Party, Green Party, and most recently, the Republican Party)

2RTZZSro 8y ago
Obesity and celebrity worship are far greater threats to US national security than "Russia"
- komali2 8y ago
  And yet the United States still sends troops to the middle East again and again and again. The greatest threat to an American life is a drunk driver. If the United States actually had priorities aligned with statistical reality, the billions poured into the war on {{concept}} would have been redirected to drunk driving decades ago. Also, smoking would be illegal.
  - 2RTZZSro 8y ago
    Regarding wars in the middle east. US foreign policy is at the mercy of the revolving door of the military industrial complex, spearheaded by Israeli dual citizens and Zionist sympathizers (many Christians) which represent Americans in Congress. Many accuse of Israel of having a "Greater Israel" project which is identical in nature to the German Nazi "Lebensraum" in its geopolitical and racial objectives. AIPAC to Deploy Hundreds of Lobbyists to Push for Syria Action Pro-Israel lobby says 250 activists will meet with their senators and representatives in Washington in a bid to win support Congressional support for military action in Syria. https://www.haaretz.com/aipac-pushing-hard-for-syria-action-1.5330700 https://www.haaretz.com/aipac-pushing-hard-for-syria-action-... http://archive.is/UWcvh http://archive.is/UWcvh US Jewish lobby challenged by 'pro-peace' rival The most powerful Jewish lobby in America is facing an unprecedented threat from a rival pro-peace pressure group that is vying for the ear of President Barack Obama. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel/5178883/US-Jewish-lobby-challenged-by-pro-peace-rival.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/israel... http://archive.is/kDcM0 http://archive.is/kDcM0 The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy: Expanding on their notorious 2006 article in the London Review of Books, the authors increase the megatonnage of their explosive claims about the malign influence of the pro-Israel lobby on the U.S. government. Mearsheimer and Walt, political scientists at the University of Chicago and Harvard, respectively, survey a wide coalition of pro-Israel groups and individuals, including American Jewish organizations and political donors, Christian fundamentalists, neo-con officials in the executive branch, media pundits who smear critics of Israel as anti-Semites and the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee, which they characterize as having an almost unchallenged hold on Congress. This lobby, they contend, has pressured the U.S. government into Middle East policies that are strategically and morally unjustifiable: lavish financial subsidies for Israel despite its occupation of Palestinian territories; needless American confrontations with Israel's foes Syria and Iran; uncritical support of Israel's 2006 bombing of Lebanon, which violated the laws of war; and the Iraq war, which almost certainly would not have occurred had [the Israel lobby] been absent. The authors disavow conspiracy mongering, noting that the lobby's activities constitute legitimate, if misguided, interest-group politics, as American as apple pie. Considering the authors' academic credentials and the careful reasoning and meticulous documentation with which they support their claims, the book is bound to rekindle the controversy. https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374531501 https://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/03...

paulpauper 8y ago

I never thought it would happen. He always seemed to stay a few steps ahead and he has plenty of of supporters and many countries that are hostile the US were willing to grant him asylum. I'm not sure how this would work. He would have to be kidnapped or given up.

tootie 8y ago
He has successfully alienated anyone who ever supported him at this point.
- jMyles 8y ago
  Not me. I still think that his efforts have cast very important light on the recent history of US Foreign Policy.
  - tootie 8y ago
    Assange is simply not an honest broker which is his one job. Even if you think the Chelsea Manning leak was valuable, what exactly was Assange's value add? The leaker was not protected. She was caught and prosecuted. The data was not protected. WikiLeaks was hacked and leaked all the raw data. The content was not shared in an objective way. Assange editorialized the content with his own opinions (ie Collateral Murder). His only contribution was to raise money to pay for hosting. There's a reason why Ed Snowden didn't give his leaks to Assange.
    - jMyles 8y ago
      If this sort of assessment is the case against Assange (in terms of his character as a journalist), then I think he has a very strong case. > The leaker was not protected. She was caught and prosecuted. You're talking as if Assange or WikiLeaks disclosed the source. Are you suggesting that a journalist has a responsibility to protect a source unto the ends of the earth, even when that source openly and flatly confides in an (in retrospect, untrustworthy) friend that she has leaked what she knows to be classified material? How exactly was Wikileaks supposed to respond? By somehow tracking down Adrian Lamo and ensuring that he didn't report her? I'm just astonished at this part of your indictment. > The data was not protected. WikiLeaks was hacked and leaked all the raw data. "Hacked?" WikiLeaks published the entire cache of documents - and I celebrate them for it. I have personally read over 600 pages (probably a thousand at this point) and I have yet to encounter one of them that I, as a United States citizen, believe was rightly withheld from my view by my government. WikiLeaks took care to redact some proper nouns from these documents, but provided unredacted versions to some journalists, along with painstaking, easy-to-follow instructions about preserving them. Nevertheless, a (much more ostensible respectable) journalist at The Guardian posted the passphrase and the files were leaked. In what universe is this a failing of WikiLeaks OpsSec? "Hacked"? What can you possibly be talking about? The only security compromise about which I'm aware on the part of WikiLeaks was a problem with their web frontend which briefly allowed a group to change it to a juvenile message. No documents were involved. > The content was not shared in an objective way. Assange editorialized the content with his own opinions (ie Collateral Murder). ...so? What's wrong with that? Let's keep things in perspective here: a person flying in a helicopter intentionally fired an explosive missile at a person standing on the ground. I know we're all pretty numb to this happening at this point, but I think it's still pretty shocking when you think about it. Maybe he did think that he was firing on someone carrying an RPG. So? It's still a crazy act, carried out during an illegal war. Calling it "Collateral Murder" doesn't turn me off in the slightest. > There's a reason why Ed Snowden didn't give his leaks to Assange. I appreciate the way that Ed Snowden conducted himself. He took a different approach and one that is welcome. I also think that Ed Snowden's criticisms of WikiLeaks are substantially more honest than yours. Can you explain why you've characterized these things in such a strange way?

xoa 8y ago

Without any opinion the merits of this case in particular, which seems like a total mess all around and I haven't been following, on the topic more generally I found "Demystifying International Extradition" [1] last year to be an interesting summary of the process. It introduced me to concepts that don't really tend to come up in local law. Amongst other pertinent aspects is that while the US generally wants to avoid binding its own hands it can do so if another nation demands it when it comes to the penalties it will seek. Lots of countries (I think including England?) will not extradite if the death penalty is on the table, but the US can apparently legally assure that it won't seek it (for capital crimes). Lot of political considerations and such in high profile cases I guess when it comes to agreements between nation-states. Everyone can be prickly about their prerogatives and who gets justice and what it means for relations and public opinion and so on. Nothing guaranteed about it. ---- 1: https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/publications/2017/01/demystifying-international-extradition https://www.arnoldporter.com/en/perspectives/publications/20...

braythwayt 8y ago
This has come up between the US and Canada. When the US seeks extradition for a capital crime, Canada nearly always asks for assurances that the US will not seek the death penalty.
monocasa 8y ago
There's also just straight up extraordinary rendition, ie. showing up, black bagging someone, and flying off, outside the legal process. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_rendition Ironically, the UK doesn't allow extraordinary rendition, and it was a big deal to even let those planes refuel or use UK airspace, but Sweden historically has allowed it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Ahmed_Agiza_and_Muhammad_al-Zery https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Repatriation_of_Ahmed_Agiza_an...
- jacobush 8y ago
  It was made a big deal in Sweden how ridiculous any fears were that Assange could be extradited from Sweden to the US if he would go to Sweden for hearings. And now...

2RTZZSro 8y ago

Julian Assange was a key figure in the early days of PostgreSQL and he contributed to NetBSD http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/tcp_subr.c?rev=1.79&content-type=text/x-cvsweb-markup&only_with_tag=MAIN http://cvsweb.netbsd.org/bsdweb.cgi/src/sys/netinet/tcp_subr... https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALtFtELs3mMM2g__fZFyFiT7u3zX1e8PevEiD5Lt920nuGjUyQ@mail.gmail.com https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CALtFtELs3mMM2g__fZFyF...

anarazel 8y ago
"key figure" as in: A few small changes. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=search&h=HEAD&st=author&s=julian https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git&a=search... https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit;h=72f76d38eb23e1fbca92f0e14b257c33e5ecccbc https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=commit... Edit: Added the one contribution he didn't commit himself.
- Myrmornis 8y ago
  What? I would be proud to have got this into postgres core, but perhaps you operate on a different plane of excellence. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdiff;f=src/bin/psql/psql.c;h=4bb783f564705f592c94cd0122929f2eda01b20c;hp=2201c064269404d2b10602fd4278d28e82bd3243;hb=76bc8cb97fc35673c42fe84fe6a9d6887260419a;hpb=23c7ff0b3c38657081590430d08ef48bb5bde759 https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdi...
  - anarazel 8y ago
    > What? I would be proud to have got this into postgres core, but perhaps you operate on a different plane of excellence. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdi.. https://git.postgresql.org/gitweb/?p=postgresql.git;a=blobdi.... It's just a minor rewrite of parts of the commandline client. Mostly made verbose by by renaming structs members / moving members around. 22+ years ago. > but perhaps you operate on a different plane of excellence. I work on PG close to full-time. So I sure hope I've many more contributions than that ;)

resters 8y ago

By doing this the US is coming to the aid of the many dictators and despots whose crimes Assange has helped reveal. Also, by ignoring the crimes revealed by the Iraq and Afghanistan war logs, the US makes it very clear that war-making cronies rule both parties and would never hold each other accountable for anything. To be clear, the war logs revealed that the US classified information solely because it revealed that the official narrative about why we were involved in those wars was false. Regardless of what one thinks about Assange, it's pretty hard to argue that the crimes revealed by the war logs aren't highly worrisome. Regardless of how one feels about Assange, it's hard to deny that WL was the most successful attempt by any journalist to unmask the widespread US war crimes that we've seen in many decades. My statement above may be too strong... so be it, but surely a court should have been able to decide the fate of the propagandists who misused their power to classify information from the American people. Instead the war criminals just attacked Assange and everyone else including most journalists do as they are asked and turned on a fellow journalist who was willing to sacrifice his freedom for the cause of truth.

StavrosK 8y ago
> the US is coming to the aid of the many dictators and despots whose crimes Assange has helped reveal. I.e. themselves.
- aglavine 8y ago
  You realize he may be a Russian spy, don't you?
  - StavrosK 8y ago
    Does that excuse the war crimes that were committed?
    - darawk 8y ago
      No, but do the war crimes the US committed mean that Assange is not guilty of being a Russian asset?

StanislavPetrov 8y ago

In an ideal world, this wouldn't be a bad thing. A trial would force the government to finally show us proof that Wikileaks was working for the Russians and they conspired criminally to hack US networks. Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world, and you should be absolutely certain that any "trial" Assange gets will be a kangaroo court where he is convicted on "secret" evidence that we won't be able to independently view or scrutinize due to "national security concerns". What's worse is people will point to Assange's conviction in this show trial as proof of all of evidence-free accusations the spy agencies and US government have been hurling around for the last 2+ years.

intralizee 8y ago
I agree, I'm surprised you're being downvoted for this opinion. Kangaroo courts happen and even when the person facing the verdict is high profile. It shows how power with the agenda of whomever is what crafts law. Logic is the thing rational people cling to and logic is not part of foundation making justice in prosecutions. The wild thing to me is how much hate assange has gathered recently online. People seem to prefer writing just throw him in jail than take the undecided stance. Makes me think things are getting worse if you're on the not happy side with how things are run.
- StanislavPetrov 8y ago
  Its being downvoted for the same reason that Assange is so hated. Unfortunately most Americans are incredibly susceptible to propaganda. Its why 90% of Americans continued to believe Saddam Hussein was involved in 9/11 even years after the invasion of Iraq. Even for those few Americans with the capacity to be skeptical and think critically, its much easier to accept "conventional wisdom" and adopt the official narrative than to consider the possibility that our government regularly disseminates lies and propaganda. Groupthink is not only real, it is perhaps the dominant driving force in society.

Myrmornis 8y ago

If true then disgusting and completely unacceptable. The way in which legal systems have been cynically abused to ruin this man's life reflects extremely poorly on the people and institutions concerned. Wikileaks' revelation of the disgusting behavior of the US armed forces in Baghdad was an extremely valuable contribution to society.

TheLilHipster 8y ago
The claims of him being a russian asset and the the links to washingtonpost and nytimes as credible sources in this thread is hilarious. I thought hacker news was more rational and logical than my twitter feed - maybe not. Assange and WL is the last bastion of free speech and genuine joirnalism left in our modern age. If you dont see that, then youre a fool.
- topmonk 8y ago
  Also, being a "Russian asset", whatever that means, doesn't affect anything. If he refuses to release dirt against Russia, the would be leaker can go to someone else or just release it themselves. He isn't the gatekeeper of all leaked information. Justifying it this way is just a ploy to punish the whistleblower and I can't believe how many people go along with it.

plugger 8y ago

long hair don't care.

anoncoward111 8y ago

[clears throat] USA killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civillians and is now jailing the whistleblowers [cough]

armenarmen 8y ago
Americans (and I sadly speak for all 300mm+ of us) no longer give a flying fuck about illegal wars or mass murder. There is no peace movement, there won’t be ever again. Citizens will ignore the wars and entertain them selves by rage posting about either the red or blue team
- anoncoward111 8y ago
  I care a lot about the genocide and illegal wars :( I've written online under my real name and fake names, I've done deep original research, some of it gets fairly decent traction. I think we all actually are legitimately powerless to stop the war machine and the majority of Americans who actually support it... so the rest of us are lost to apathy.
  - armenarmen 8y ago
    Good on you. I hope it takes. And yeah, I believe that we are legit powerless to do anything about it. No party is a peace/non-intervention party. I don’t think that most Americans support the war aspect of the machine. It’s apathy for some and learned helplessness for others.
    - mrleinad 8y ago
      Hey, if Assange/Snowden had ever believed they were powerless, we wouldn't be talking about them. Same goes for countless other figures throughout history. It's up to us who believe something else to convince more people and achieve critical mass, which will make the difference.
      - jacobush 8y ago

kuwze 8y ago

If he had kept his promise after Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning I would care.

jMyles 8y ago
What a silly point on which to turn your concerns about government misconduct, especially when it involves the 1st amendment. > Obama pardoned Chelsea Manning First of all, that never happened. You are drastically exaggerating the relief offered by the government. The government tortured this person for years and then, even after offering this (in the great scheme of things, small) gesture of commuting her sentence, it still kept her locked up for an absurd amount of time, ostensibly for administrative reasons. It was too little too late for me, and too little too late for Assange. If the government wanted to take the deal he offered, it had the opportunity to immediately pardon Manning and call Assange out on it. Then we'd know if he was bluffing. This (less than) half measure doesn't cut.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- kevin_thibedeau 8y ago
  > ostensibly for administrative reasons Manning took an oath to keep secrets and violated that oath fully understanding that it can lead to incarceration.
- sigmar 8y ago
  >It was too little too late for me, and too little too late for Assange. If the government wanted to take the deal he offered, it had the opportunity to immediately pardon Manning and call Assange out on it. Then we'd know if he was bluffing. This (less than) half measure doesn't cut. What? Assange asked for clemency. "If Obama grants Manning clemency Assange will agree to US extradition despite clear unconstitutionality of DoJ case". and I'm not sure how it was "too little too tale for Assange" since it was days after that that Obama granted clemency. Also- you seem to care so much for Manning that you went the extra mile to avoid using her preferred pronouns by using "this person." Amazing.

CryptoPunk 8y ago

What someone's motivation is (in relation to the still unsubstantiated allegation that Assange is a "Russian asset" trying advance Russian foreign policy objectives) should be completely irrelevant to the legality of an action. Is publishing leaked documents protected under the First Amendment? Is publishing "propaganda" protected under the First Amendment? I would say the answer to both of these questions is yes.

onetimemanytime 8y ago
All these questions his attorneys can try to answer during the trial. That he was /is a Russian asset, I think we pretty much know. Maybe he needed a bear hug in light of everyone behind against him...or maybe Russia had dirt on the country he wanted to hurt?
- CryptoPunk 8y ago
  I see this claim a lot, yet no evidence to substantiate it. What evidence do you have that he is/was a Russian asset? And what does it matter if it's a Russian asset doing the leaking, instead of a selfless journalist? Is the leaking illegal or not? This "Russian asset" angle seems like ad hominem to make people acquiesce to violating freedom of speech.
  - onetimemanytime 8y ago
    CIA Director: 'It's time to call out Wikileaks for what it really is, a non-state hostile intelligence service often abetted by state actors like Russia.' It's normal for us not to have any direct evidence, but to see the results of their behavior. CIA on the other hand might have recordings, communication etc. They have been digging for years.
    - CryptoPunk 8y ago
      An organization dedicated to publishing leaked documented can be "abetted" by any number of intelligence agencies by the nature of its function. That doesn't make it an asset of any intelligence agency.

oh_sigh 8y ago

Who are these people who are 'familiar with the matter'? Look at the people 'familiar with the matter' regarding the apple/et al spy chip story. How can we, as consumers of news, ever know if there is any kind of truth from these anonymous sources, or if they are just trying to nudge either public perception, or key players(wikileaks, ecuador, etc) in a certain way?

frankharv 8y ago
I just bough a Quanta LGA2011 board off ebay. In the BIOS PXE settings were IP's that belong to Amazon. So I have to wonder if Amazon even used SuperMicro hardware. I know with great certainty that they used Quanta as a board manufacturer. So who planted this story is my question. Who would stand the most at bringing down SuperMicro. I would rule out the Chinese because they were made to look bad. So who else in the US manufactures motherboards and would benefit from SuperMicro's demise. Did the same people also drive SuperMicro stock down to a point of it being delisted? I hated seeing a "Designed in the USA" motherboard manufacturer dragged through the mud. I have used their affordable dual CPU motherboards dating back to BX chipset. Ultra-reliable and feature packed. I even made some negative Supermicro comments at the time. Amazing how easily even intelligent people can be brainwashed. The problem with the story is that all of the accusations are technically feasible. We know TAO does this from Edward Snowdens wonderful truthfulness. So we all wanted to have an Ahh-Ha moment. Too bad we were duped.

liveoneggs 8y ago

fun fact: Julian Assange was an early NetBSD developer. Long live proff@ ;)

nl 8y ago

What are the planned charges likely to be for? My understanding is that the original leaks were likely to be difficult to win a case over. His actions during the 2016 election campaign maybe a different story though. It's unclear exactly what he is alleged to have done.

bigbluedots 8y ago

I wonder if the espionage act will suffice, or whether they'll need to make up some new laws here?

scythe 8y ago

How do they plan to get him out of the embassy without violating the Vienna Convention? He's been amazingly... immature and disruptive... in the embassy, but has there ever in history been a case of a refugee being remanded to their oppressor because of how annoying they are? To be fair, Assange seems to be really annoying.

auslander 8y ago

Assange should hand the site over to Anonymous, just in case.

tempz 8y ago

It's elementary, my dear Watson: 1. WL disclosed information to US population. 2. WL is accused of being "Non-state Hostile Intelligence Service". 3. Hostile intelligence services work for enemies. 4. US population is the enemy.

sjg007 8y ago

I hope and pray that some smart lawyers come to his defense in both in England, Ecuador, and the USA. I hope that "we" are collectively smart enough to support him (and Snowden). He is probably not a Russian agent... all of that talk is a distraction (especially with Mueller).. if Russia left him out to dry then they would seriously curtail their intelligence operations... after all memes and fake news are far more effective. If he is a Russian agent, the Prisoners Dilemma applies: Will Trump pardon or will Russia declare? Russia has more to lose here. Maybe there is a way out for Russia and the US but I doubt it. This is actually an interesting case.. a 3 party prisoners dilemma.. any ideas? One of my biggest regrets is not supporting Aaron.. at the time it would not have been much but maybe collectively and everyone together. Maybe we were too late to recognize that he was ahead of his time... and maybe we still are. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4529484

0x8BADF00D 8y ago
AIPAC will never let that stand. Human rights are okay, as long as those countries are either neutral or allied with Israel.
FireBeyond 8y ago
Why so? He has shown himself over time to be someone who has constantly reneged on his responsibilities, made obtuse efforts to be "understanding" when he has no standing ("offering" to be interviewed via video from the embassy - who else gets to decide how, when, where and if they are interviewed on criminal charges?), and shown himself to be entirely partisan in his motives when it comes down to it. Why should "we" be "collectively supporting him", precisely?
- sjg007 8y ago
  What exactly is partisan?
  - FireBeyond 8y ago
    Contrived and controlled releases to influence a narrative in a particular desired direction. Being given a trove of documents categorized as misdeeds by both sides of government and largely sitting on those by one side, and releasing those that adversely impact the other. Partisan.

bbunix 8y ago

2 words: Jury Nullification. "Jury nullification occurs when a trial jury reaches a verdict that is contrary to the letter of the law because the jurors either: * disagree with the law under which the defendant is prosecuted, or * believe that the law shouldn’t be applied in the case at hand." https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-jury-nullification.html https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/what-jury-nullificat...

anarazel 8y ago

Looks like it already happened a few months back. Earlier today Seamus Hughes noticed an apparent copy&paste mistake in an independent court filing: https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/1063232297674162176 https://twitter.com/SeamusHughes/status/1063232297674162176 Which the WaPo just corroborated: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/julian-assange-has-been-charged-prosecutors-reveal-in-inadvertent-court-filing/2018/11/15/9902e6ba-98bd-48df-b447-3e2a4638f05a_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/julia...

amanaplanacanal 8y ago

I can't read the article. Does it mention what charges might apply? If he conspired with the hackers, I can see where criminal charges might come in. If he merely published documents afterwards, I'm not sure what they could charge him with.

codedokode 8y ago

As I understand, Assange is not an US citizen. How can they prosecute him? Wikipedia page [1] says: > Opinions of Assange at this time [2010] were divided. Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard described his activities as "illegal," but the police said that he had broken no Australian law. United States Vice President Joe Biden and others called him a "terrorist". Some called for his assassination or execution. That's ridiculous. American soldiers killing civilians are "good guys", and Assange is a terrorist? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange

lazyasciiart 8y ago
Citizenship isn't usually relevant to prosecution, unless it's for something like treason. The US prosecutes foreigners for hacking crimes committed outside of the country as well.
- codedokode 8y ago
  This is bad. Because other countries might take the same approach. What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? Like critisizing Communist Party? I don't see the difference between US prosecuting Assange and China prosecuting those who, being infinitely malignant, publish illegal, misleading information about Communist Party or Tiananmen square events thus bringing the authority and good name of the Government into contempt.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Because other countries might take the same approach They do. > What if China, Iran or Russia will start prosecuting US citizens for posts on the Internet that are against their laws? They...do. Well, not necessarily posts on the internet specifically, but... And, in some cases, not just the “appear before a court with counsel to answer charges with some simulation of due process” way of addressing crimes against their laws. Consider, e.g., the fatwa against the author, editors, and publishers of The Satanic Verses, whose targets were neither Iranian citizens nor operating in Iran.

parrellel 8y ago

Well, it only took ~7ish years, and two more character assassinations, but in the end they're going to get him, as expected. Profoundly unfortunate.

surfingtheweb 8y ago

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-cyberwar-commentary-idUSKBN12X075 https://www.reuters.com/article/us-russia-cyberwar-commentar... "...Vice President Joe Biden said on NBC’s Meet the Press that “we’re sending a message” to Putin and “it will be at the time of our choosing, and under the circumstances that will have the greatest impact.” When asked if the American public would know a message was sent, Biden replied, “Hope not.” This statement has haunted me since I first watched Biden's interview in 2016. What are Biden's plans to avenge Clinton's lost campaign? I've always thought it has something to do with Assange, but aside from discretely murdering Assange, I can't think of anything the US could do to avenge Hilary's loss that the public wouldn't know about. Clinton asked why we couldn't just drone Assange. Maybe they'll make his death look like an accident or a health issue?

qume 8y ago

There is a real, if small, chance that there could be a general election in the UK soon and potentially a more favourable labour government. If I were Assange I would do whatever I could to hang in there at least long enough to rule that possibility out.

throw2016 8y ago

Let's leave all the war criminals from Iraq so we have repeats in Libya and Syria. Let's forgot about the bankers and fraud. Let's not do anything about the NSA and liars like Clapper. Let's instead get Assange. This makes a lot of sense, but only if you are a pretend democracy. That should read the US regime is preparing to 'persecute' Julian Assange and should be a reality check for anyone remotely concerned about democracy, free press and dissent.