Assange apparently will benefit from our somewhat deference to the press:
The Justice Department has all but concluded it will not bring charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for publishing classified documents because government lawyers said they could not do so without also prosecuting U.S. news organizations and journalists, according to U.S. officials.
The officials stressed that a formal decision has not been made, and a grand jury investigating WikiLeaks remains impaneled, but they said there is little possibility of bringing a case against Assange, unless he is implicated in criminal activity other than releasing online top-secret military and diplomatic documents.
The Obama administration has charged government employees and contractors who leak classified information — such as former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden and former Army intelligence analyst Bradley Manning — with violations of the Espionage Act. But officials said that although Assange published classified documents, he did not leak them, something they said significantly affects their legal analysis.
Alright lawyers, what say you?
srv
I say it doesn’t matter as long as Obummer is channeling Yoo all the time.
Zifnab25
Obama is an out-of-control tyrant set on destroying our freedoms!Obama is a feckless coward that refuses to protect America from its enemies!
lol
Step 1: “We have little hope of bringing a case against Assange since he was not the one who leaked the materials.”
Step 2: Assange stupidly steps on US soil.
Step 3: “We do however have these emails to Bradley Manning encouraging him to leak classified material to Wikileaks.”
jibeaux
I say it’s beer time for me.
I never said I was a GOOD lawyer.
Belafon
@srv: “We believe we have the right to perform diplomacy any time we want.”
polyorchnid octopunch
I’m glad to see they woke up and smelled the coffee. That said, if I was Assange, I’d be staying away from the US anyway.
If the US does go after him anyway, it’ll make it even more of a laughingstock… after all, there are heavy duty war criminals busily beavering away in the US with total impunity.
Cacti
I’d say, since he’s pretty much trapped inside the Ecuadorian embassy, why bother.
Amir Khalid
But Assange is still hiding, isn’t he, from a possible criminal prosecution in Sweden. As long as that charge isn’t going away, even if the US definitively declares it’s not pressing charges, he’s not going to be making a triumphant exit via the Ecuadoran Embassy’s front door.
Cacti
@Amir Khalid:
If the grand jury does not return an indictment for any US charges, that could potentially be a big concern for Assange for other reasons. If the evil Yanquis aren’t going to be prosecuting him, then Ecuador is reduced to shielding him from extradition for sex crimes in Sweden, and may decide to expel their permanent house guest for that reason.
Amir Khalid
@Cacti:
In that case, his exit from the Ecuadoran embassy would be the opposite of triumphant.
pharniel
I think it’s worth the paper it’s written on. A/k/a a new admin could change their mind.
OT – the wife tried to get a 3ds xl from amazon lightning deal – got waitlisted and then something failed and never informed her she could purchase it and just got the ‘sorry you missed the deal’ notification.
Amazon support was Ever So Helpful.
Now I’m getting nothing but Amazon banner adds for nintendo 3ds xl at full price.
Irony. Who says it’s dead?
scav
@Amir Khalid: Bingo.
The reflected light of your opponents can lend stature.
Yatsuno
@Amir Khalid: The official tale of Assagne hiding in the Ecuadorean embassy was fear of British prosecution as well. AFAIK the Brits haven’t charged him yet, and if the Americans decide to not charge him then the only legal claim is in Sweden against him. And I don’t think Ecuador would risk a diplomatic incident over harbouring a potential criminal. They need Volvos in Quito after all.
Eric U.
I offer a service for $20 that would let people avoid stupid things like considering prosecuting Assange for wikileaks. I call my service, “simple answers for $20” I could have told them not to bother a couple of years back, and it no doubt would have saved us all from being embarrassed by our government.
Constance Reader
He has never been indicted or charged for any crimes in Sweden. They want to question him, which he offered to do several times in London, Sweden refused to question him there (even though they have a history of doing the same in other cases). Assange knew that if he traveled to Sweden, they would extradite him to the U.S.
KG
sounds about right… wikileaks/Assange probably would get to invoke the defense of press shield. First Amendment and all that. Pretty much a Pentagon Papers type case, I’d think. The next few years will probably be interesting regarding First Amendment and freedom of the press – mainly because there’s going to be a question of what constitutes “the press.” Basically, does any old jackass with a webpage (looks around), who spouts off on issues and/or occasionally reports original news constitute “the press”?
scav
@Eric U.: Oddly enough, we just had an entire thread largely about the odd attraction of simplistic answers to complex issues.
Frankensteinbeck
Even in this thread so many people are sure that the US government is out to get Assange. The only evidence is now in the other direction, and it doesn’t change their mind at all.
MomSense
@jibeaux:
I am going to brew my own beer! I have friends who brew their own and they are teaching me how. Planning to buy the equipment at this place richmondhomebrew.com/Supplies.html for Christmas.
Ash Can
@Constance Reader: Well, now that the US isn’t going to prosecute, his excuse goes out the window.
FlipYrWhig
@Frankensteinbeck: Envision a boot not stomping on a human face forever.
Anoniminous
@Yatsuno:
“Volvos in Quito” would be a good name for a Soft Pop band.
Betty Cracker
@Frankensteinbeck: Well, the DoJ impaneled a grand jury and investigated Assange, so if you define “out to get” as “contemplating charges against” him, wasn’t the assumption correct?
KS in MA
OT, but the Pope seems to have actually read Adam Smith (source: National Catholic Reporter, ncronline dot org):
54. “In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. … Almost without being aware of it, we end up being incapable of feeling compassion at the outcry of the poor, weeping for other people’s pain, and feeling a need to help them, as though all this were someone else’s responsibility and not our own. The culture of prosperity deadens us …”
Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student
@Frankensteinbeck:
The US government has a very bad habit of over classifying EVERYTHING, whilst telling bald faced lies to the populace on matters involving its conduct in our names (Pat Tillman anyone?).
Members of Congress sitting on committees dealing with classified information are constrained in what they can discuss, even on the floors of the House and Senate.
To put it simply, there is no formal, legal method by which the citizenry can have any oversight or demand any accountability from our government on these matters.
Wikileaks/Assange, the Pentagon Papers, and other similar leaks prove that unless disclosed outside of official channels, the government will merrily commit all manner of crimes, misdeeds and atrocities in our names and use the blowback from such actions to sow ever more fear, dischord and paranoia with the intent to get us to grant them ever more licence to do these things in complete secrecy.
Assange rubs a lot of people the wrong way, this I get, but he’s no arch villain. More like misguided prick who decided to take on City Hall.
Nverthelss, I were someone who’d stuck his thumb in the eye of the US Security StateTM, I would steer well clear of the US or its ‘happy to extradite’ clients for the rest of my days.
Botsplainer
If I were running a grand jury, all of them would get indicted as co-conspirators. Assange, Poitras, Harrison, that mendacious fucker Griftwald, Miranda.
Let the chips fall where they may. The notion of Greenwald in prison amuses me to no end.
Betty Cracker
@KS in MA: Wow. Let’s see how K-Lo spins that!
MattR
@Betty Cracker: And it is not like they are saying that they don’t want to prosecute Assange. Only that they can’t do it right now because of the collateral damage of also prosecuting more traditional news organizations. It seems pretty clear that the US gov’t would be happy to go after Assange if they could figure out another way to do it.
Anoniminous
@MomSense:
Once you get the equipment you can also brew your own root beer, sarsaparilla, ginger beer, ginger ale, etc. cheaper and 100% better than the high fructose corn syrup laced crap they sell in the store.
Frankensteinbeck
@Betty Cracker:
Except listen to this very thread. ‘Contemplating charges against him’ is not the same as ‘out to get him’. The belief being pushed is that if he remains anywhere in the world that the US can get to him, he will go to jail or worse because the government finds him embarrassing. Instead the legal system in the US ran its normal course and found that he’s not only not guilty, it’s not even worth charging him.
Ash Can
@Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student: So sexual assault isn’t a crime in your country?
scav
@Frankensteinbeck: But not charging does not necessarily mean not guilty, it can also mean not a strong enough, unambiguous enough, case against him, no?
polyorchnid octopunch
A lot of you folks express a really touching faith in your justice system.
Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student
@Ash Can:
It most certainly is.
If Assange is guilty of that, then he should be charged.
For that particular crime.
Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student
@Ash Can:
It most certainly is.
If Assange is guilty of that, then he should be charged.
For that particular crime.
Ash Can
@Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student: Indeed. So let Swedish justice be served. If the US is declining to charge Assange, then Assange no longer has the excuse of fearing extradition for failing to comply with that country’s investigation. After all, Cacti raises a good point. Does Ecuador really want to harbor someone fleeing nothing more, or other, than sexual assault charges?
Cassidy
@Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student: He has to stop hiding first.
Mnemosyne
@Voytek Dolinsky, Dean of Student:
He has been charged. He fled to the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid being extradited back to Sweden to face those charges.
Anoniminous
@polyorchnid octopunch:
A lot of us have been paying attention over the last 50 years.
slightly_peeved
@Constance Reader:
.. because the Swedish justice system requires that questioning, on Swedish soil, as a prerequisite for charges. they can’t charge him until he is in Sweden. hence the extradition application.
besides which, people suspected of crimes generally don’t get to dictate terms to the police attempting to arrest and charge them, in my experience.
MomSense
@Anoniminous:
I can’t wait!
The Sheriff's A Ni-
@slightly_peeved: White people of privilege get to dictate terms all the time in Greater Firebaggia, even more so when they can gleefully stick it to The Man.
Heck, the system just showed it still works (sorta), yet just look at the posts to this thread.
dmbeaster
@Mnemosyne: Actually, whether or not he has been formally charged is murky, due to various procedural practices in Sweden. This was one of the grounds for fighting extradition, in that extradition is permissible only for “accused persons”, as opposed to those sought for questioning. The Swedish proceedings conducted to date seem to be in some murky area in the middle — the English court decided that it was enough over the line to make Assange as “accused person” as that term is used in the extradition statute. The opinion is here, click the third link under “External Links” a the bottom.
Gopher2b
A big part of the job is trying to figure out whether a jury would convict. I don’t think they would here, and I think Snowden is even safer. I kind of wish he would come back and roll the dice just to see everyone’s reaction when he’s acquited.
Omnes Omnibus
@Gopher2b:
I disagree strongly. Assange has a very credible claim of being a journalist. Oddly, the fact that some of the materials he published were edited, probably bolsters that claim. Snowden has no such claim. In addition, Assangem as an Australian, has no obligation to protect US secrets. Snowden as a US citizen with access to classified data did have such an obligation. Snowden’s claims for whistleblower protections are, IMO, rather weak as well – whistleblower protections basically require that one have tried “proper channels” to bring any wrongdoing to light before one goes public. I have seen no evidence so far that Snowden attempted to any such thing.
Burnspbesq
@lol:
That’s pretty much it. I believe that if all the facts were known, Assange would be seen to have aided and abetted Manning; but if Manning persists in keeping her yap shit, it’s a tough case to make.
Gopher2b
@Omnes Omnibus:
I should have been clearer. With regard to Snowden, I was just talking about the likelihood of jury nullification.
dopey-o
@scav:
….. something about innocent until proven guilty….. does that ring a bell?
Fred
So now Assange gets to decide if he would rather serve a life sentence in the Ecuadorian embassy or roll the dice with the brutal Swedish justice system where his worst fear could be three months of counseling for inappropriate sexual behavior and a possibility of free educational opportunities in greater Stockholm. No doubt the Ecuadorian embassy has better food so there’s that.
Knowing swedes, one of his victims will probably offer to put him up for the duration. He should bring his own sheets and towels. Ikea always has good deals.
Cervantes
@Mnemosyne: He has been charged.
From your own link:
Harold Samson
@Mnemosyne:
Jesus, can’t you *read*? From the link you present as evidence that Assange has been formally charged: