12 ms·
Prosecutors Have Prepared Indictment of Julian Assange, a Filing Reveals
- sschueller 8y agoSo sad to see all this effort to "kill the messenger" instead of first prosecuting the ones that committed murders and war crimes.
- salimmadjd 8y agoIt saddens me to see so many people I consider “progressives” who are cheering this on like a crowd of mobs about to burn a witch.
- __Joker 8y agoAt the end of the day,I think everybody knew or had an idea that how this is going to end. Unfortunately, Assange and in effect WikiLeaks took a political and partisan position, and gave the moral footing for the authorities to that end.
- metildaa 8y agoSo far it has yet to end, which is quite surprising. Sad to see how far my country will stoop to attempt to abscond with a foriegner, he will not have a fair trial if extradited.
- brokenmachine 8y agoI'm Australian - it's sad for me to see how little our government will do to protect one of our own who has helped to expose the war crimes of our allies, and has himself still not been charged with any crime, notwithstanding clearly transparent character smear rape allegations that have been dropped anyway. And when asked his position on the issue of an Australian citizen in effectively indefinite imprisonment, our pathetic excuse for a Prime Minister simply dodges the question by making lewd comments about the questioner. https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/pamela-anderson-is-not-happy-with-australian-prime-minister-scott-morrison/news-story/6933a146bf9cd94591dffc55f030cd11 https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/real-life/news-life/pamela...
- sneak 8y ago> Unfortunately, Assange and in effect WikiLeaks took a political and partisan position, and gave the moral footing for the authorities to that end. So free speech, due process, and publishing rights are only granted to the nonpartisan? Are you kidding me? This is part of a coordinated and well-funded effort by the CIA to reduce sympathy for him and his cause, so that they can deny him human rights without a big stink as soon as he's in US or US-ally custody. It's absolutely shameful.
- __Joker 8y agoNot sure which set of free speech you subscribe to but I really doubt WikiLeaks publishing stealing information falls under the definition of US constitution of free speech. It is NOT. I am not sure what publish rights you are talking about. You must be kidding yourself, if I may borrow your language, to talk about publishing rights and WikiLeaks in the same breath. The thing is I do love the principle on which WikiLeaks was founded. Is what WikiLeaks doing legal ? Hell, no. But morally I know it is the right thing to do. Again, as mentioned elsewhere, my problem with WikiLeaks is has taken a side. And telling the truth selectively and conveniently. And that does not deserve the moral approval, which I would have given earlier.
- thecatspaw 8y agoAgreed, whereas previously they told the unconvenient truth, they grew into a political outlet asking their twitter followers to vote for specific presidency candidates
- rndgermandude 8y ago>I really doubt WikiLeaks publishing stealing information falls under the definition of US constitution of free speech. It actually is legal to publish stolen information, and there is a lot of legal precedent in the US saying it is. And that's a good thing as it is sometimes the only way to hold those in power accountable for their actions they'd otherwise hide. See e.g. Pentagon Papers, Iran-Contra, US torture program, Snowden, Panama papers, just to name a few, all of which were at least in part based on leaked (read: stolen) information. Also the Trump administration is leaking like a sieve these days. Do you consider the journalists who publish such information criminals too? This is legally different to stealing the information yourself and/or instructing somebody else on how to steal information. I'd wager they'll at least try to pin the latter on Assange if they ever get him in a court.
- colordrops 8y agoWhat moral footing is that? * There is no unbiased media outlet * There are no laws against partisan media outlets * It's not even clear that Wikileaks is partisan, despite rantings to the opposite effect * Nothing wikileaks has released has ever been proven to be false.
- bayesian_horse 8y agoI think it's pretty clear wikileaks has been used in a partisan manner in the 2016 presidential elections. I don't believe most serious journalists would have published most of Podesta's emails, if any. Especially considering the probable sources.
- colordrops 8y agoWhy would they not publish these emails?
- bayesian_horse 8y agoBecause most of them are completely irrelevant and there is very little informational benefit to warrant this privacy violation. I mean... risotto recipes? After wikileaks published the material journalists did cover some of it. And even so, they partly regret that, in light of what we know now.
- harry8 8y ago"serious journalists" Approved by the state, perhaps?
- bayesian_horse 8y agoThose with a particular "traditional" ethics standard. Which is getting muddier by the day.
- harry8 8y ago
- richardknop 8y agoShould Buzzfeed journalists be prosecuted for publishing the dossier about golden shower, at least parts of which have been proven to be false? As far as I know, there is nothing wrong with publishing information in partisan manner. Has anything Wikileaks published been proven to be doctored or edited in any way? I am under the impression not even DNC is disputing authenticity of the emails.
- danso 8y agoHow much of the dossier came from systems hacked by a foreign power?
- colordrops 8y agoIt doesn't matter legally or otherwise.
- danso 8y agoI agree but the parent commenter implication that an outlet could be prosecuted for printing the Steele dossier is a non sequitur for many reasons here.
- vallesmarineris 8y agoI have seen no such aggressive, hateful and awful language from a progressive person. I think most people who identify as progressive would never use such violent words, as progressives are more likely to be compassionate and kind to others. I have only seen people like you use awful words like that - who are these progressives saying that? I think there are none. I think it's just you, making up lies about people on the left being violent and awful. Nobody is "cheering this on like a crowd of mobs about to burn a witch". That is awful. Why would you say such a thing? You are trolling and trying to create a hyper-political atmosphere on HN, where the only allowable opinions are hyper-conservative, and violent, hateful words are falsely attributed to progressives.
- clatan 8y agoNo, he's absolutely right. And your idealization of 'progressives' is completely laughable.
- collyw 8y agoCheck out Sargon of Akad's youtube channel, he does a good job of documenting and commenting on "progressives" especially when they are behaving hatefully or violently. (Any reason for the down votes? You may not like Sargon, but he he addresses exactly what the OP is talking about a lot of the time.)
- subroutine 8y agoYou must not be active on twitter. It's probably true the left is on average more passive, but to claim it's unlikely any progressive would spew vitrol or be violent?? Ever heard of antifa?
- richardknop 8y agoHave you read the other thread about Julian Assange on HN today with hundreds of replies? It's full of people calling him a traitor and/or an evil Russian spy that should go to prison for life. Many sensible comments defending Assange as a journalist got down voted all the way to the bottom.
- 8y ago
- creato 8y agoNo one here knows what he is even charged with. I highly doubt it's something we expect. Plenty of media outlets passed information along similarly to Wikileaks. Any charges limited to actions we know publicly are going to be a disaster on so many levels, and everyone involved knows it. It would be monumentally stupid to pursue charges based only on what we know publicly. The NYT story makes this clear. I suggest withholding judgement until we see the actual indictment. The other indictments that are (possibly) related that have been made public have provided a lot of detail and evidence.
- bayesian_horse 8y agoTotally agree. Though open source intelligence suggests that Assange did launder information he received from Russian intelligence services. He played a key role in the chain of them influencing the presidential election. To me this is not a case of clearly being a crime or clearly not being one. Room for further investigation and a trial.
- intothemild 8y agoYeah whilst we don't know the indictments yet, I think it's safe to say that they might be related to the documents which he published from the Russian hacking. The rumors that he knew that he was talking with the GRU and that the documents were stolen by the Russian government is one thing.. But the idea he had foresight that the Russian government was trying to get Trump elected is something that might come out. Progressives, like myself who supported Wikileaks are curious at what Mueller has put together. If the worst is true, then Assange used Wikileaks as a tool to try to make sure Clinton did not become president. It's known that Clinton did not like Assange before the hacking leak, it's my guess that Assange published those documents in some effort to undermine her election chances. Part of me, think's that's OK. if it's OK for someone to come out with some crimes that someone might have committed and stand up and testify to that, then it's in the voting public's best interest to have all the facts.. Then again, there's the possibly non-zero chance he knew that this was coming from the GRU or at least the Russian government, which anyone in his org should have had experience in asking themselves the larger questions around this...
- bsder 8y agoProof demanded. Any good Assange did blowing the whistle has been completely undermined by his collusion with Russia to help thwart democratic institutions and processes. I classify Snowden as a patriotic whistleblower. I classify Assange as a Russian agent. Treat both appropriately.
- bayesian_horse 8y agoThe case on Snowden isn't that clear, either. I do believe he did something good for the world overall. I'm not entirely convinced he hasn't been working for the Russians at some time before or after the original leaking.
- kmlx 8y agohe wholeheartedly received and used information from the Russian GRU in order to help Trump win. and he did this over the course of years. "messenger"? more like russian asset.
- kmlx 8y agohttps://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/21/julian-assange-russia-ecuador-embassy-london-secret-escape-plan https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/sep/21/julian-assange... "Russian diplomats held secret talks in London last year with people close to Julian Assange to assess whether they could help him flee the UK, the Guardian has learned. A tentative plan was devised that would have seen the WikiLeaks founder smuggled out of Ecuador’s London embassy in a diplomatic vehicle and transported to another country. One ultimate destination, multiple sources have said, was Russia, where Assange would not be at risk of extradition to the US. The plan was abandoned after it was deemed too risky." Russian asset.
- TangoTrotFox 8y agoOne big issue with your conclusion - there is no context. What alternative destinations would you propose? Any US whistle blowers or leakers that manage to gain the ire of the US government itself need to seek refuge in an area that will not bend to US pressure. Given the remarkable scale of influence of the US today that leaves very few places, and even fewer that can provide a comfortable life. Among the top there would be Russia and China.
- BurnGpuBurn 8y agoAnother article with an unnamed source. I don't believe those anymore, there's too much of them and most turn out to be false later.
- puranjay 8y agoI'm not American so I don't claim to understand the politics, but it seems to me that Russia is one of the few countries capable of resisting US pressure, which makes people like Assange and Snowden gravitate towards it. The alternative would be imprisonment or death for them
- jamespo 8y agoThe messenger hasn't reported on any Russian corruption for a very long time, obviously they don't have any
- cdmckay 8y agoSo we should shoot him if he only reveals war crimes for one country, instead of 2? I'm failing to see what your point is.
- jamespo 8y agoPortraying his motives as "the truth must out" is very disingenuous. And he's antisemitic to boot
- brokenmachine 8y agoHe may or may not be antisemitic, but how many Apache helicopter attacks on civilians and children has he performed?
- bayesian_horse 8y agoIt's not clear he has committed no crimes. If the DOJ believes he committed crimes, they have every right and reason to try and prove that.
- olh 8y agoWhere in the USA is Julian Assange?
- onetimemanytime 8y agoSupermax in a few years. USA does not forget or forgive these things. The later moves to help Russia distribute emails that moved a US election are just the icing on the cake.
- walru 8y agoI've still yet to see any quantifiable data points which say how exactly the elections were swayed due to anything Assange was a part of.
- richardknop 8y agoAny release of damaging information about a party involved in an election can change the result. This has not been a problem before when Wikileaks almost definitely influenced the result of Kenyan election in 2007. Assange even got an Amnesty International award for leaking information then.
- lawlessone 8y agoThere's loads. Trump standing up on a podium and asking Russia for help and then retweeting the leaks. It had such an impact one lunatic entered a pizza parlour with a gun and another posted pipe bombs to the clintons , Obama , Soros etc.
- walru 8y agoI suppose you're referring to pizza-gate. I'm also assuming you did zero digging into that narrative on your own. Keep eating that gov't cereal from the MSM.
- altmind 8y agoif the NSA position is "you dont have to hide anything if you are innocent" why the DoS are pursuing the wistleblower who expose goverment secrets? wait, I think it works only one way.
- metildaa 8y agoSomething to this effect is accurate. Assange aired war crimes commited by my country to the world that were purposefully and fraudulently classified. Rather than own up to the crimes commited, the politicans at the time chose to shoot the messenger and created an international incident.
- King-Aaron 8y agoThe key word in that phrase is "you".
- mehrdadn 8y ago> if the NSA position is "you dont have to hide anything if you are innocent" Source? Former NSA director has disputed this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV2HDM86XgI&t=1h21s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kV2HDM86XgI&t=1h21s
- matt4077 8y agoI don't think the NSA has actually ever made that argument. There is, after all, a lot of law governing privacy. And the NSA's capabilities and required procedures are also specified in minute detail. Even though these rules are far from adequate, their mere existence already shows a shared assumption that privacy is a legitimate interest. Arguing against the very idea of privacy would mean trying to prove far more than they could ever want, and doing so against essentially everyone else.
- melling 8y ago“WikiLeaks published thousands of emails that year from Democrats during the presidential race that were stolen by Russian intelligence officers. The hackings were a major part of Moscow’s campaign of disruption.“ So, his indictment, if it’s happening, is related to the investigation of Russian interference in the 2016 election? It also doesn’t sound like we have clarity if Assange is going to be indicted: “It was not clear if prosecutors have filed charges against Mr. Assange.”
- dominicr 8y agoIf the US wanted to punish Assange maybe the best way is to massively ignore him and get everyone else to do the same. He's an attention freak, so walking out of his self-imposed imprisonment to resounding silence would hit him where it hurts. (Personally I think whistle blowers are an important part of applying transparency and checks to companies & governments, just some of the information merchants aren't the nicest of people.)
- sneak 8y agoNYT: > Mr. Assange has lived for years in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London and would have to be arrested and extradited if he were to face charges in federal court, altogether a multistep diplomatic and legal process. Meanwhile, The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/04/julian-assange-wikileaks-arrest-friday-un-investigation https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/feb/04/julian-assange... > Julian Assange is in arbitrary detention, UN panel finds Also from The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-manning-cruel-inhuman-treatment-un https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/mar/12/bradley-mannin... > Bradley Manning's treatment was cruel and inhuman, UN torture chief rules So, yes, simply "living" in the embassy. Nice dodge, NYT. The USA are the bad guys here, and no amount of deliberate obfuscation by the CIA is going to be able to ultimately hide that. This whole thing is a national shame.
- C1sc0cat 8y agoHe can leave at any time how can it be arbitrary - trouble is Mr Assange fled bail which is an offence in all countries.
- sneak 8y agoWhen he leaves he will be transferred to the US and tortured, just like Manning was. His trial will be a farce, just like Manning's (did you know POTUS—Obama at the time—declared Manning guilty prior to trial?). You, or I, or anyone would skip out on bail if appearing means you get given to torturers who will torture you without a trial. That's not his choice, it's the choice of the people out to physically harm him. If he stays he will never receive a trial or be allowed to face his accusers. Either way his human rights are violated. That's why it's arbitrary detention. It's why his indictment has been kept secret; they want to physically grab him before they have to justify, legally, the charges against a journalist who published things in the public interest. If they weren't being shady about the whole thing, he could have been charged by now - but doing so would require them to be subject to legal scrutiny. They don't want that, because they don't have a leg to stand on. They won't tip their hand officially until he's already physically in their (or their allies') custody.
- moomin 8y agoObviously we don’t know all the facts here, but since this is linked to the Mueller investigation, we can make an educated guess that this is not to do with anything that occurred before Assange entered Ecuador. Whilst we know a fair bit about his actions before (for which he was never charged), afterwards gets significantly more obscure but certainly he’s been hanging out with some dodgy characters (including the one mentioned in the article) and appears to have been a sitting accomplice in a plot to destabilise the US. So, whilst this disclosure is a huge cock-up, there’s no reason to believe any of this has free press or free speech implications.
- sneak 8y ago> and appears to have been a sitting accomplice in a plot to destabilise the US. Except that that plot's sole function was publishing documents in the public interest. If your country can be destabilized by pressmen doing what pressmen do, then your country needs destabilizing. That's the point.
- dragonwriter 8y ago> Except that that plot's sole function was publishing documents in the public interest. No, it (allegedly, at least) was not. It's maybe arguable that it was, or if it wasn't that that's all Assange was aware of about it's mechanism of serving it's function, but to the extent that either of those is sufficient to raise a first amendment claim in the first place, it is still a disputable fact claim, which is what we have trials to weigh evidence to resolve.
- kome 8y ago> So, whilst this disclosure is a huge cock-up, there’s no reason to believe any of this has free press or free speech implications. well, well... there is a lot of speculation and not a lot of facts in what you say, so far.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago> Obviously we don’t know all the facts here, but since this is linked to the Mueller investigation, we can make an educated guess...
- fuscy 8y agoThe message being sent seems to be that shining light on government things, a hero makes not. I'm not going to compare Assange with Superman, but remember that Superman was Clark Kent and he would have also shown the world if someone did nasty things while publicly wearing a halo of virtue (government).
- mrleiter 8y agoThe government filed a motion to seal a criminal complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia. [1] Such a motion, according to Local Rule 49B in this district [2] lays forth that such a motion shall include (1) A statement as to why sealing is necessary, and why another procedure will not suffice; (2) References to governing case law; and (3) A statement as to the period of time the government seeks to have the matter maintained under seal and as to how the matter is to be handled upon unsealing. The slip-up happened in the third condition: the period of time the government seeks to have the matter maintained under seal. In the motion, paragraph 5, they argue it "would need to remain sealed until Assange is arrested in connection with the charges in the criminal complaint", which implies that, at the least, the government has prepared an indictment against Julian Assange. Could they have filed this motion without referencing Assange? Possibly - if another suspect is sought in connection. If they could have referenced another sealed criminal complaint? That I don't know, frankly. [1] https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/179/399086/18919235200.pdf https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/179/399086/18919235... [2] http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/localrules/localrulesedva.pdf http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/localrules/localrulesedva.pdf edit: The motion was filed on 22nd of August this year. edit 2: Could also be that they have made a copy-paste error. At that point you possibly cannot tell IMO if that is the case. There is the prosecution that says this was made in error.
- walru 8y agoAnd because a journalist wants to protect his source (aka. Seth Rich/his family) we have people calling him a traitor and worse. Sadly, this is one time I wish he'd put down his integrity and finally unveil who delivered him Hilary's emails.
- fastball 8y agoIn the "Collateral Murder" era, Assange seemed to be nothing more than a whistleblowing journalist with good intentions. At this point though, it's very clear that Assange is a partisaned actor with a very clear and very biased agenda (the fall of America). Whether or not you agree with that agenda does not change the fact that it is anything but impartial and he can't be trusted to deliver fair or balanced reporting.
- walru 8y agoNo.... that's only because this has gone against the narrative you wish existed.
- fastball 8y agoWhat exactly is the narrative I wish existed? The facts are that Assange does not release information as soon as it has been vetted, and he does not release everything that could be released. This is not a man who wants to reveal the truth at large, this is a man that wants to reveal certain truths and not others with a very specific political agenda. I fully supported Assange when he seemed an unbiased actor in pursuit of the truth and holding the US and others accountable for their actions. I was horrified at many of the early Wikileaks leaks, but glad that such things were being brought to light. But now it seems that Assange neither cares for the transgressions of any other country save the US, and neither does he seem to care for the truth for the sake of it.
- Tepix 8y agoBeing a biased journalist wasn't illegal last time i checked. It's not "very clear" to me that Assange's agenda is the "fall of America".
- jamespo 8y agoI thought he was already in the US, he promised he'd go there if Chelsea Manning was released?
- rando444 8y agoTo everyone leaving comments, please read the article. > ... suggesting that prosecutors had inadvertently pasted text from a similar court filing into the wrong document and then filed it. This was a copy-paste error from another filing. Somehow it seems everyone is missing this fact in their armchair analysis.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- dragonwriter 8y agoIf it was a copy-paste error from another filing, that means that there is another filing (sealed, as no previous public filing has) which relates to charges against Assange. Either way, the same basic information is revealed by the error; the only way a copy-paste error changes the basic import is if it's from a dummy document, but then you have to believe the Justice Department uses “Julian Assange” as the name of the generic defendant in dummy documents.
- rando444 8y agoCorrect. At the time that I posted this 100% of the initial 20+ comments were under the impression that this particular indictment was related to Assange.
- edoo 8y agoA lot of people don't realize wikileaks had tons of dumps on Russia and conservative US politicians and refuse to accept the information in the progressive leaks due to supposed Russian or conservative involvement. Also as far as I know people don't realize anything wikileaks ever released has been refuted or proven false. There are google DKIM keys on all the legally and morally incriminating emails.
- richardknop 8y agoJust to repeat myself one more time here for those not aware of this since this is the top comment. Wikileaks has almost definitely influenced the result of Kenyan election in 2007 by releasing the Kroll report about vast corruption. Assange even got an Amnesty International award for leaking information then. He was a hero back then but suddenly when the shoe is on the other foot, he's a villain.
- thomasz 8y agoHe became the villain when he became highly selective with the material he releases, which turned him from being a provider for whistle-blowers to a propagandist.
- cf498 8y agoWikileaks aims for the best possible exposure of a leak. This influences in what form the information is published and over what timeframe. They dont just dump the entire leak and hope some journalist can be bothered to read it before the next big headline takes the focus away again. This takes a lot of work. Making sure your sources are protected takes a lot of work and sadly, there is only so much attention people spend on leaks.
- ryanlol 8y agoRussia tried just dumping data with DCleaks. Those were a complete failure because of the lack of WL-like media game.
- 8y ago
- chvid 8y agoI remember when Wikileaks came out and Assange was cool; how they were the first (at least for a wide audience) to do secure drops for whistleblowers. Funny thing; I can’t seem to place when things changed for Wikileaks. The rape case in Sweden maybe or the manning leaks. Now they appear to be outright operates for the Russian state.
- harry8 8y agoDoes anyone happen to know why the NYT are reporting Russia as a source of the democrat emails as a fact without any caveats? Is there any actual evidence for it at all?
- lawlessone 8y agohttps://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/us/politics/guccifer-russia-mueller.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/us/politics/guccifer-russ...
- harry8 8y agoWhich is the part of that considered to be "evidence"? The diagram in that story is just comical, right?
- sctb 8y agoPrevious discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18464358 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18464358.