Trump Justice Department Crosses New Line, Charges Assange With Publishing U.S. Secrets

link

In a stunning escalation of the Trump administration’s war on the press, the Justice Department has indicted WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for revealing government secrets under the Espionage Act. It's the first time a publisher has been charged under the World War I-era law.
The indictment charges Assange with 16 counts of receiving or disclosing material leaked by then-Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in 2009 and 2010. The charges invoke broad provisions of the Espionage Act that make it a crime to disclose or retain any defense information knowing it “could be used to injure” the U.S. The act has no exception for reporters or publishers, but prior administrations have balked at invoking the law against journalists for fear of colliding with the First Amendment.

This is a good question.

Is Assange a journalist? Or is he an activist who merely leaks secrets to embarrass governments.

What do people here think about this?

Should he be prosecuted and sent to jail for this or is he being unfairly indicted?

Will, I think there might be a few surprises in all of this. On the surface it looks like the national security state going for blood. Maybe so.

Having said that, I've never been able to fully trust Assange. I flip-flop on that aspect.

I will say that Manning, so far, deserves a " Trans-Person of the Year" award for apparently hanging tough. I'm rather impressed.

Interesting times. Scary, but interesting.

a reply to: Willtell
I await comment from those good folks at The Intercept.

a reply to: Willtell

Thanks Trump...
Real big man....

a reply to: Willtell

If you think this is bad, wait until you see what the justice department does to the traitors who have, and currently work inside the US government!

Seems pretty simple to me. He's being charged with what he did. There's nothing technically wrong with what Trump is doing in this instance. If you have a quarrel with it, you have to quarrel with the law as it's written. Which would seem to lead to the conclusion that this law is unconstitutional. Which is A BIG PROBLEM for a government that loves it's secrets.

So basically, Trump hasn't crossed any actual line in this case. He is merely illustrating that when a law is written in such a way that it leaves wiggle room, someone will eventually wiggle.

a reply to: JohnnyCanuck

Glenn will run the story, and as an ex constitutional lawyer, he's the voice I want to hear.

This is BS though. No one was at risk, it was information the public deserved to know. The rights of those in and outside of the US have been dissolving post 9/11, and even though the people know we've been lied to, they don't care.

Hmmmm, honestly not sure on this one.

I'm on the fence.

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Seems pretty simple to me. He's being charged with what he did. There's nothing technically wrong with what Trump is doing in this instance. If you have a quarrel with it, you have to quarrel with the law as it's written. Which would seem to lead to the conclusion that this law is unconstitutional. Which is A BIG PROBLEM for a government that loves it's secrets.

So basically, Trump hasn't crossed any actual line in this case. He is merely illustrating that when a law is written in such a way that it leaves wiggle room, someone will eventually wiggle.

You do not see? Trump vowed to end the very people Assange leaked on. Do you see?

originally posted by: Arnie123
Hmmmm, honestly not sure on this one.

I'm on the fence.

We keep letting the government take inches until it's a mile.

While I respect what WikiLeaks have done at times, Assange is off the rocker. I don't necessarily like him as a person, but if we aren't willing to stand up for people we don't agree with, it's just a matter of time until we're next.

The precedent set by not just this administration, but others, is that if you embarrass those in charge, you'll pay legally or with your career.

We're close to the point of no return. Those who trust Trump will be just as guilty if not more than those who trusted Obama.

Read the trends people.

Your rights trump laws and common law trumps Trump, simple as that.

The first amendment is not giving someone a right, it is simply acknowledging that god-given (birthgiven) right exists.

So what are your rights? They are whatever the general agreement is. This is why it is important we don't just agree with every law, bill or act simply because of a piece of paper written by someone WE put in charge creates.

For me, I feel, as humans, we have a right to know what our agencies, including the governments we have created, acting on our behalf are up to. They forcibly take our money to fight these wars through taxation and mandating services such as medical cover to us, the least we deserve is the right to know that money they have taken is not going to further exploitation and corruption for their own agendas.

I believe a reporter has not only the right but an obligation to report whatever the breaking story is. If a reporter can get hold of this information, the enemies can too, so why shoot the reporter and not those in charge of the information and behind the corruption?

If you think this is bad, wait until you see what the justice department does to the traitors who have, and currently work inside the US government!

We'll be watching it do nothing at all.

1) You have to be charged to be brought into questioning and/or a court of law .
2) The DoJ had to "trump" other countries charges to get Assange into a US Court .

The question is , is this for good or evil ?
Hold onto your hats folks , may be strange times coming....

Heroes of the 21st century so far.

Julian Assange, Chelsea Manning and Edward Snowden, may God bless and protect them from the evils on power.

originally posted by: TheGreatWork

originally posted by: BrianFlanders
Seems pretty simple to me. He's being charged with what he did. There's nothing technically wrong with what Trump is doing in this instance. If you have a quarrel with it, you have to quarrel with the law as it's written. Which would seem to lead to the conclusion that this law is unconstitutional. Which is A BIG PROBLEM for a government that loves it's secrets.

So basically, Trump hasn't crossed any actual line in this case. He is merely illustrating that when a law is written in such a way that it leaves wiggle room, someone will eventually wiggle.

You do not see? Trump vowed to end the very people Assange leaked on. Do you see?

And Obama said there would not be an individual mandate in Obamacare. I saw that.

originally posted by: Willtell

link

In a stunning escalation of the Trump administration’s war on the press, the Justice Department has indicted WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for revealing government secrets under the Espionage Act. It's the first time a publisher has been charged under the World War I-era law.
The indictment charges Assange with 16 counts of receiving or disclosing material leaked by then-Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning in 2009 and 2010. The charges invoke broad provisions of the Espionage Act that make it a crime to disclose or retain any defense information knowing it “could be used to injure” the U.S. The act has no exception for reporters or publishers, but prior administrations have balked at invoking the law against journalists for fear of colliding with the First Amendment.

This is a good question.

Is Assange a journalist? Or is he an activist who merely leaks secrets to embarrass governments.

What do people here think about this?

Should he be prosecuted and sent to jail for this or is he being unfairly indicted?

"Is Assange a journalist? Or is he an activist who merely leaks secrets to embarrass governments. "

Which journalists today who leaked secrets about Trump (whether false or real) are activists who merely leak those secrets to embarrass government(s)?

All of them, and especially CNN, NYT, MSNBC.

How are they different from Assange? Many leaked classified information too.

This is a huge mistake for Trump to get behind unless he plans on indicting most of the MSM and the big brass from the Obama administration as well for doing pretty much the exact same things as Assange. Assange' role was to provide an anonymous method of doing this, but the MSM and government moles did the very same thing with the expectation of no one snitching them off.

This is a vote breaker for me for Trump doing this.

a reply to: carewemust

but, but, isn't it maintained in the Q threads that they are being "fixed" silently so as not to collapse society?

You can't have it both ways......


waiting, waiting........

a reply to: The GUT

I think GUT Assange is definitely a target of the US deep state Military/Intel structure I think he might beat this case but he should have if he could have got out of the way like Snowden. The US police/military Intel doesn’t care who's president, if you cross them they will get you sooner or later.

a reply to: BrianFlanders

The article is from a leftist blog, so naturally, they mention the present president; if Obama or Hillary were in office it would be the same.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

The justice department made this statement while indicting Assange. As per the article in the link.

The Justice Department immediately sought to draw a distinction between Assange and the press in a briefing for reporters announcing the new indictment.
“The department takes seriously the role of journalists in our democracy and we thank you for it,” said John Demers, head of the department’s National Security Division. “It has not and never has been the department’s policy to target them for reporting. But Julian Assange is no journalist.”
Demers cited WikiLeaks’ publication of the names of U.S. government sources, saying it endangered people in China, Iran, and Syria.

Can one say Assange is a journalist? Maybe. But the US power structure doesn't think so