5 ms·

> Allegedly Assange agreed to crack password-hashes for Manning, supplying the resulting fresh passwords to Manning to use. Read the chat logs. This allegation

by Canada 3y ago

> Allegedly Assange agreed to crack password-hashes for Manning, supplying the resulting fresh passwords to Manning to use. Read the chat logs. This allegation is actually false. First, it's not totally clear that Assange agrees to crack the password, though he does remark that he had the capability to do so. He definitely doesn't supply the cracked password. > Just imagine a newspaper editor saying: "Wow, these documents you found while burgling the mansion are awesome, hey, how about I give you fresh lockpicks and a grappling-hook so you go back and check the upper floors that you couldn't reach before?" And then imagine the newspaper editor not actually supplying the lockpicks or grappling-hook and never speaking of it again.

Terr_ 3y ago
> First, it's not totally clear that Assange agrees to crack the password, Assange said he "passed it into our lm guy", which is an implicit--but clear!--signal that he will help with the technical problem, along with being a kind of small assistance all on its own. > Read the chat logs. This allegation is actually false. [...] He definitely doesn't supply the cracked password. That part doesn't matter, since Assange is accused of conspiracy to X. That one word is very important, it means a chat-log showing him agreeing to assist with the X is sufficient grounds to charge him with that related crime. Analogy: You message me explaining you need to crack data on a CAN bus in order to steal a luxury car, and I agree to analyze your collected data and find the secret key needed to disable the security systems. Those chat-logs would still be enough to charge me (and you) with conspiracy to commit grand theft auto: It doesn't matter if I never touched the car myself, and it doesn't matter if I failed at extracting a secret key, the important thing is we each acted and collaborated towards a crime.
- jstarfish 3y ago
  You need to do something to demonstrate intent to follow through in order to get hit with conspiracy charges [that aren't politically-motivated]. You would, for your involvement with the car theft-- you're knowingly participating in a crime and provided material support. Assange didn't follow up on his own agreement. Even in the famous "cannibal cop" case-- whether or not the cop was actually going to kidnap anyone, he did look up "victims" on the state computer. It was no longer "talk" once he took a step toward making it happen.
  - Terr_ 3y ago
    > You need to do something Hold up, I think you're confusing "all" with "any". The conspiracy is launched if any conspirator takes an additional act to further it. Simply appearing later in the script doesn't mean an actor isn't part of the play. So we must ask what co-conspirator Manning was doing. Even if we assume in Assange's favor that nothing prior to this exchange matters, I have a very hard time believing that after 2010-03-08T16:11:40 Manning just totally quit trying to access that computer or other resources. (Plus whatever Assange's "LM guy" might be doing with the data.) > [In the car-theft analogy] You would [be charged] for your involvement with the car theft--you're knowingly participating in a crime and provided material support. Assange didn't follow up on his own agreement. I would be charged, but not for that reason. Like I said before about the car example, I could still fail to extract the secret key and/or have no chance to deliver any material support. However if you do any further actions like surveilling the owner's movements or tapping more data, I'm still in legal jeopardy because the law does not require every single conspirator to have done an additional act. ____ To use another analogy with clearer timing: On Monday Bob calls Alice, and Alice agrees to drive a getaway car for a Friday bank-robbery. There's nothing for Alice to actually do or prepare yet, because she already has a car and knows the area. On Tuesday Bob is arrested trying to acquire some guns. Did Alice deliver on her promise? No. Can Alice be charged with conspiracy to rob the bank? Yes.
    - Canada 3y ago
      It's questionable. It's clear the motivation for the US prosecution is completely corrupt. And on top of that, if Assange is guilty then so is every reporter who reports on leaked classified material. In any case, Assange has already been punished more than enough. It's time to let him go.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - Terr_ 3y ago
        > if Assange is guilty then so is every reporter who reports on leaked classified material *facepalm* That statement is false, and you haven't shared any shred of argument to explain why you think it sounds truthy. 1. Assange isn't being charged with "reporting on leaked classified material" because doing that is not a crime! [0][1] 2. Assange is being charged with things that--as I've repeatedly just explained--are crimes that all those other reporters would not be anywhere even close to committing. ___ [0] https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/505/new-york-times-co-v-united-states https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/505/new-york-ti... [1] https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/575/bartnicki-v-vopper https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/575/bartnicki-v...

by Canada 3y ago

Terr_ 3y ago

> First, it's not totally clear that Assange agrees to crack the password, Assange said he "passed it into our lm guy", which is an implicit--but clear!--signal that he will help with the technical problem, along with being a kind of small assistance all on its own. > Read the chat logs. This allegation is actually false. [...] He definitely doesn't supply the cracked password. That part doesn't matter, since Assange is accused of conspiracy to X. That one word is very important, it means a chat-log showing him agreeing to assist with the X is sufficient grounds to charge him with that related crime. Analogy: You message me explaining you need to crack data on a CAN bus in order to steal a luxury car, and I agree to analyze your collected data and find the secret key needed to disable the security systems. Those chat-logs would still be enough to charge me (and you) with conspiracy to commit grand theft auto: It doesn't matter if I never touched the car myself, and it doesn't matter if I failed at extracting a secret key, the important thing is we each acted and collaborated towards a crime.

jstarfish 3y ago
You need to do something to demonstrate intent to follow through in order to get hit with conspiracy charges [that aren't politically-motivated]. You would, for your involvement with the car theft-- you're knowingly participating in a crime and provided material support. Assange didn't follow up on his own agreement. Even in the famous "cannibal cop" case-- whether or not the cop was actually going to kidnap anyone, he did look up "victims" on the state computer. It was no longer "talk" once he took a step toward making it happen.
- Terr_ 3y ago
  > You need to do something Hold up, I think you're confusing "all" with "any". The conspiracy is launched if any conspirator takes an additional act to further it. Simply appearing later in the script doesn't mean an actor isn't part of the play. So we must ask what co-conspirator Manning was doing. Even if we assume in Assange's favor that nothing prior to this exchange matters, I have a very hard time believing that after 2010-03-08T16:11:40 Manning just totally quit trying to access that computer or other resources. (Plus whatever Assange's "LM guy" might be doing with the data.) > [In the car-theft analogy] You would [be charged] for your involvement with the car theft--you're knowingly participating in a crime and provided material support. Assange didn't follow up on his own agreement. I would be charged, but not for that reason. Like I said before about the car example, I could still fail to extract the secret key and/or have no chance to deliver any material support. However if you do any further actions like surveilling the owner's movements or tapping more data, I'm still in legal jeopardy because the law does not require every single conspirator to have done an additional act. ____ To use another analogy with clearer timing: On Monday Bob calls Alice, and Alice agrees to drive a getaway car for a Friday bank-robbery. There's nothing for Alice to actually do or prepare yet, because she already has a car and knows the area. On Tuesday Bob is arrested trying to acquire some guns. Did Alice deliver on her promise? No. Can Alice be charged with conspiracy to rob the bank? Yes.
  - Canada 3y ago
    It's questionable. It's clear the motivation for the US prosecution is completely corrupt. And on top of that, if Assange is guilty then so is every reporter who reports on leaked classified material. In any case, Assange has already been punished more than enough. It's time to let him go.
    - deleted 3y ago
      [deleted]
    - Terr_ 3y ago
      > if Assange is guilty then so is every reporter who reports on leaked classified material *facepalm* That statement is false, and you haven't shared any shred of argument to explain why you think it sounds truthy. 1. Assange isn't being charged with "reporting on leaked classified material" because doing that is not a crime! [0][1] 2. Assange is being charged with things that--as I've repeatedly just explained--are crimes that all those other reporters would not be anywhere even close to committing. ___ [0] https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/505/new-york-times-co-v-united-states https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/505/new-york-ti... [1] https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/575/bartnicki-v-vopper https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/575/bartnicki-v...