Slashdot Mirror


US Prepares Charges To Seek Arrest of WikiLeaks' Julian Assange (cnn.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNN: U.S. authorities have prepared charges to seek the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, U.S. officials familiar with the matter tell CNN. The Justice Department investigation of Assange and WikiLeaks dates to at least 2010, when the site first gained wide attention for posting thousands of files stolen by the former U.S. Army intelligence analyst now known as Chelsea Manning. Prosecutors have struggled with whether the First Amendment precluded the prosecution of Assange, but now believe they have found a way to move forward. During President Barack Obama's administration, Attorney General Eric Holder and officials at the Justice Department determined it would be difficult to bring charges against Assange because WikiLeaks wasn't alone in publishing documents stolen by Manning. Several newspapers, including The New York Times, did as well. The investigation continued, but any possible charges were put on hold, according to U.S. officials involved in the process then.
The U.S. view of WikiLeaks and Assange began to change after investigators found what they believe was proof that WikiLeaks played an active role in helping Edward Snowden, a former NSA analyst, disclose a massive cache of classified documents.
Attorney General Jeff Sessions said at a news conference Thursday that Assange's arrest is a "priority." "We are going to step up our effort and already are stepping up our efforts on all leaks," he said. "This is a matter that's gone beyond anything I'm aware of. We have professionals that have been in the security business of the United States for many years that are shocked by the number of leaks and some of them are quite serious. So yes, it is a priority. We've already begun to step up our efforts and whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail." Meanwhile, Assange's lawyer said they have "had no communication with the Department of Justice."

12 of 369 comments (clear)

  1. It's not his arrest that is a priority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    but rather to stop the world from hearing inconvenient truths and all the wrongs the U.S. is doing. Making an example out of Assange won't help anything though, there will just be someone else stepping up. Assange is not the problem, you are.

    1. Re: It's not his arrest that is a priority by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "The world" has already been told everything it really needed to know. After the cablegate and Snowden revelations there should have been a massive backlash against the US. All countries, beginning with the EU, should have by right severed all connections with the US and imposed sanctions. People should have taken to the streets in protest day and night. What happened? Nothing. The whole world shrugged it off save for a few voices that were quickly marginalized and ridiculed. Apathy rules. All is lost.

  2. good idea ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "We've already begun to step up our efforts and whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail"
    Hello Secret US various services, you actually broke the law(s), performed illegal operations and basically fucked up your internal security.
    Do you have members you would like to nominate for internment or...?

  3. Anybody have the exact quote? by meta-monkey · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anybody have the exact quote from Sessions?

    Attorney General Jeff Sessions said at a news conference Thursday that Assange's arrest is a "priority."

    "We are going to step up our effort and already are stepping up our efforts on all leaks," he said. "This is a matter that's gone beyond anything I'm aware of. We have professionals that have been in the security business of the United States for many years that are shocked by the number of leaks and some of them are quite serious. So yes, it is a priority. We've already begun to step up our efforts and whenever a case can be made, we will seek to put some people in jail."

    I'm very suspicious when the news media writes their own sentence and then quotes a single word from someone. Was Sessions talking specifically about Assange, or about leakers? Assange is not a leaker, he's a publisher of the things leakers leak. It's perfectly reasonable for the Justice Department to go after people who are entrusted with US government secrets who then leak them.

    Without the full question and answer, then it looks like Sessions could have just as easily said "we're going after leakers" and then CNN says "Assange is a leaker, therefore Sessions is going to arrest Assange," despite Sessions not saying or meaning that.

    --
    We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
  4. Re:BETRAYAL by Desler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    He's doing things he was always going to do. You elected a guy whose sole reason for winning was to enrich himself and his family. And you fell for it all over a bunch of stupid dog whistles.

    But! But! Duh emails! Benghaziiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii!

    Trump and his family are laughing at you and the rest of the alt-right all the way to the bank.

  5. No, the real crime here is... by wisnoskij · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wikileak published documents showing massive corruption in the democratic party. The big news organizations did not publish those leaks, they told their listeners it was illegal to even view them.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
    1. Re:No, the real crime here is... by interkin3tic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The worst they showed is that Hillary was paid by banks to speak. We knew that already. We also know that corruption did not win HRC the nomination.

      The big news organizations didn't publish on it? Yeah, I forgot only the little guys like Time or CNN ran with stories from it.

      (/sarcasm) The big news organizations if anything failed to report clearly enough on the DNC e-mails. Too many bernie-bros who were convinced it proved the Clintons used their Benghazi military to crush Sanders, rather than "There was nothing much interesting in them."

      As for not publishing the e-mails themselves, that's kind of the SOP. Wikileaks publishes everything down to social security numbers and GPS coordinates of informants in war zones, responsible news organizations attempt to hide private details like phone numbers. No shit they didn't publish the leaks directly, that would have been irresponsible.

  6. Assange is a US citizen? by freax · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What am I missing here? I thought Assange isn't a US citizen. He also wasn't on US soil when he received, nor when he published the material. How is the US juridical system involved, then?

  7. Re:That's going to be tought to prosecute by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Supreme Court has overturned pretty much everything except, maybe, temporarily holding someone quiet to prevent revealing an imminent D-Day style invasion, and even theoretical at that.

    If he paid or aided, then he becomes a spy. If he just received and published, he is safe. The statement he has no First Amendment right because he is not a US citizen is an embarrassing statement by a US official. A law is a law and Congress shall make no law. The idea of making something illegal outside the jurisdiction of the US which cannot even be made illegal inside the US is contradictory seven ways from Sunday.

    --
    (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
  8. Unbelievable Arrogance by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Julian Assange is not a U.S. citizen. He does not run WikiLeaks from the U.S. It takes an incredible, overweening arrogance for U.S. officials to assume that every goddamned person in the world, wherever they may be, is subject to Washington's dictates. Imagine if the tables were turned -- say, the Russian government seeking to extradite and arrest an American citizen for acts that violated some Russian law but which occurred thousands of miles outside of Russian borders.

  9. Re:BETRAYAL by ph1ll · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, not quite fake. Snopes has it as "unproven".

    When asked about it, Clinton said "I don't recall that" which is not the same thing as a denial. Remember, she is a lawyer and plausible deniability comes with the territory.

    She replied (watch the video) that if it she had said it, it would have been a joke. People can choose to believe her or not believe her but it's not 100% certainty it's fake.

    --
    --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
  10. Re:This is meaningless..... by jez9999 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Erm, you're assuming that he wouldn't have been extradited to the US before getting to Sweden, which was always his issue. Not dodging Swedish "justice".