Below is my column in USA Today on the Julian Assange arrest. We are still learning more about Assange’s confinement, including bizarre accounts of Assange’s conduct in the Ecaudorian Embassy in London. The key question will be the highly generalized allegation in the single count indictment from the Justice Department that Assange played an active role in the hacking. That would cross the Rubicon for journalists and make this an even more difficult case for those worried about free speech and the free press. Yet, the indictment is strikingly silent on details or an assertion that Assange actually used the password. We will likely learn more as the May hearing approaches for his extradition.
Here is the column:
“He is our property.” Those celebratory words of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., came on CNN soon after the news of the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
It was a sentiment shared by virtually everyone in Washington from Congress to the intelligence services. Assange committed the unpardonable sins of embarrassing the establishment — from members of Congress to intelligence officials to the news media. And he will now be punished for our sins. Despite having significant constitutional arguments to be made, it is likely that he will be stripped of those defenses and even barred from raising the overall context of his actions in federal court. What could be the most important free speech and free press case in our history could well be reduced to the scope and substance of an unauthorized computer access case.
For years, the public has debated what Assange is: journalist, whistleblower, foreign agent, dupe. The problem is that Assange is first and foremost a publisher.
Moreover, he was doing something that is usually heralded in the news media. WikiLeaks disclosed disclosed controversial intelligence and military operations. It later published emails that showed that the Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Hillary Clinton lied in various statements to the public, including the rigging of the primary for her nomination. No one has argued that any of these emails were false. They were embarrassing. Of course, there is not crime of embarrassing the establishment, but that is merely a technicality.
The criminal charge against Assange filed in a federal court was crafted to circumvent the obvious constitutional problems in prosecuting him. The charge is revealing. He is charged with a single count for his alleged involvement in the hacking operation of Chelsea Manning in 2010.
By alleging that Assange actively played a role in the hacking operation, the government is seeking to portray him as part of the theft rather than the distribution of the information. The prosecutors say Assange helped Manning secure a password to gain access to additional information. If true, that would be a step that most news organizations would not take.
It’s likely there will be a superseding indictment once Assange is successfully extradited to the United States. Moreover, the Justice Department is likely to move aggressively to strip Assange of his core defenses. Through what is called a motion in limine, the government will ask the court to declare that the disclosure of intelligence controversies is immaterial.
This would leave Assange with only the ability to challenge whether he helped with passwords and little or no opportunity to present evidence of his motivations or the threat to privacy. For the jurors, they could simply be faced with some Australian guy who helped with passwords in hacking national security information. It would be like trying a man for breaking and entering while barring evidence that the house was on fire and he thought he was rescuing people instead.
They will punish Assange for their sins
The key to prosecuting Assange has always been to punish him without again embarrassing the powerful figures made mockeries by his disclosures. That means to keep him from discussing how the U.S. government concealed alleged war crimes and huge civilian losses, the type of disclosures that were made in the famous Pentagon Papers case. He cannot discuss how Democratic and Republican members either were complicit or incompetent in their oversight. He cannot discuss how the public was lied to about the program.
A glimpse of that artificial scope was seen within minutes of the arrest. CNN brought on its national security analyst, James Clapper, former director of national intelligence. CNN never mentioned that Clapper was accused of perjury in denying the existence of the National Security Agency surveillance program and was personally implicated in the scandal that WikiLeaks triggered.
Clapper was asked directly before Congress, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”
Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” Later, Clapper said his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he could make.
That would still make it a lie, of course, but this is Washington and people like Clapper are untouchable. In the view of the establishment, Assange is the problem.
Washington needs to silence Assange
So on CNN, Clapper was allowed to explain (without any hint of self-awareness or contradiction) that Assange has “caused us all kinds of grief in the intelligence community.” Indeed, few people seriously believe that the government is aggrieved about password protection. The grief was the disclosure operations and controversies long unknown to the American people. Assange will be convicted of the felony of causing embarrassment in the first degree.
Notably, no one went to jail or was fired for the surveillance programs. Those in charge of failed congressional oversight were reelected. Clapper was never charged with perjury. Even figures shown to have lied in the Clinton emails, like former CNN commentator Donna Brazile (who lied about giving Clinton’s campaign questions in advance of the presidential debates), are now back on television. Assange, however, could well do time.
With Assange’s extradition, all will be well again in Washington. As Sen. Manchin declared, Assange is their “property” and will be punished for his sins. Once he is hoisted as a wretch, few will again entertain such hubris in the future.
Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY’s Board of Contributors, is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley
“Assange possesses the keys to vast amounts of truth and information.”
The Left might very well off him to prevent his truth telling.
“He is our property.” Translation “He is our bitch.”
When is Congress going to make Pichai, Zuckerberg and Dorsey their property, their bitches too?….Oh wait, they can’t. Not until they stop being Pichais, Zuckerbergs and Dorseys bitches first.
Turley says: ” It would be like trying a man for breaking and entering while barring evidence that the house was on fire and he thought he was rescuing people instead.”
I have a closer analogy: It would be like someone opening your mailbox, taking out your bank statement, scanning it and posting it on the internet. If you call yourself a “publisher”, is such conduct protected by the First Amendment?
You aren’t really trying to argue that Assange had some altruistic intention of “rescuing” anyone, are you?
Nutcaca writes: “You aren’t really trying to argue that Assange had some altruistic intention of “rescuing” anyone, are you?”
You believed Obama “Hope and Change” meme and Hillary’s “Fighting for you” agitprop.
Funny you think Assange was malevolent but swoon over Hillary.
Why is that?
Sources? (NB: MSM don’t count)
I agree, Natacha.
Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that a rogue service employee makes quick photos of customer credit cards and drivers licenses, then forwards said photos to a so-called ‘publisher’ who posts them online. It’s hard to see how Assange is any different than that so-called ‘publisher’.
Know anything about the Citizens’ Commission to Investigate the FBI?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizens%27_Commission_to_Investigate_the_FBI
Settle in and read “The Burglary” by Betty Metzger. You might just learn something.
You and Natacha could form a little book club.
That Wikipedia article makes no reference the legalities concerned or how the courts regarded it. I wouldn’t condone anything of the sort. FBI informants shouldn’t live in fear of retribution because of a break-in.
Educate yourself.
Yeah, you don’t know.
Again, educate yourself. You’re a cocky one.
What are you talking about?
Start with John and Bonnie Raines. Wonderful people and all Americans should know about them:
https://www.phillymag.com/news/2015/01/11/john-bonnie-raines-edward-snowden-1971/
“A sense of ease came slowly, as events unfolded. In 1972, Hoover died of a heart attack. In 1973, a routing slip found among the Media files, bearing the abbreviation COINTELPRO, proved to be one of the most important discoveries in American history.”
COINTELPRO.
Ever hear of it, Peter?
The same game is in play. Only the name has changed.
The “deep state” does not want the truth out.
The true value of Assange is his truth, information and knowledge.
Punishment is unproductive.
The only thing prosecution produced in the Bradley Edward Manning case was a severadictomy.
Assange possesses the keys to vast amounts of truth and information.
Assange should be given full immunity for those keys.
If Assange is not granted immunity, it will be because the “deep state” does not want the truth out.
Lets discuss how the media have lied, omitted facts and stories and have manipulated the American people
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6903755/Kenneth-Starr-admits-omitted-report-Hillary-Clinton-triggered-Vince-Fosters-suicide.html
—-
Ken Starr says Hillary Clinton DID trigger Vince Foster’s suicide when she humiliated him in front of White House staff and admits he omitted the finding in FBI report because he didn’t want to ‘inflict further pain’ on her
‘Hillary put him down really, really bad in a pretty good-size meeting.
She told him he would always be a little hick town lawyer who was obviously not ready for the big time,’ former FBI agent Coy Copeland told Kessler
Ronald Kessler, a former Washington Post and Wall Street Journal investigative reporter, is the New York Times bestselling author of The First Family Detail: Secret Service Agents Reveal the Hidden Lives of the Presidents, The Secrets of the FBI and The Trump White House.
Ken Starr deliberately left out of his final report the FBI’s finding that Hillary Clinton ‘triggered’ the suicide of President Clinton’s Deputy White House Counsel to spare her feelings, DailyMail.com can reveal.
FBI agents investigating the death of Vince Foster learned he was set off after Hillary attacked and humiliated him in front of other White House aides a week before he took his own life on July 20, 1993.
But for what were then unexplained reasons, Starr elected to conceal the FBI’s finding that Hillary’s tirade triggered Foster’s suicide when he wrote his final report on the matter.
At a reception for authors participating in the 2019 Annapolis Book Festival last weekend, I asked Starr why he omitted the damaging FBI finding.
At first, he beat around the bush, citing well-established facts indicating that Foster was already depressed before Hillary lashed into him at the White House meeting.
But when pressed, Starr admitted he ‘did not want to inflict further pain’ on Hillary by revealing that her humiliation of Foster a week before he took his own life pushed him over the edge.
Mueller Draft Report Says Trump ‘Helped Putin Destabilize the United States’, Watergate Journalist Says
https://www.newsweek.com/mueller-report-trump-helped-putin-destabilize-us-watergate-journalist-1289541
Legendary journalist Carl Bernstein has said that he’s been told that special counsel Robert Mueller’s report will show how President Donald Trump helped Russia “destabilize the United States.”
Bernstein, who is renowned for his coverage of the Watergate scandal that led to the resignation of former President Richard Nixon, appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources on Sunday to discuss two bombshell reports released this weekend, one from The New York Times and one from The Washington Post, which revealed new details about whether or not Trump and his aides have colluded with Russia.
The Post reported that Trump has gone to “extraordinary lengths” to conceal direct conversations he has had with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Times article revealed that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation into Trump after he fired former bureau director James Comey in 2017, suspecting the president could be working on behalf of Russia. Trump has angrily denied allegations that he worked with Russia and has regularly attacked the media for reporting on the investigation. But Bernstein slammed Trump’s dismissal of the probe.
“This is about the most serious counterintelligence people we have in the U.S. government saying, ‘Oh, my God, the president’s words and actions lead us to conclude that somehow he has become a witting, unwitting, or half-witting pawn, certainly in some regards, to Vladimir Putin,’” Bernstein explained during his appearance on Reliable Sources .
“From a point of view of strength… rather, he has done what appears to be Putin’s goals. He has helped Putin destabilize the United States and interfere in the election, no matter whether it was purposeful or not,” the journalist added. He then explained that he knew from his own high-level sources that Mueller’s report would discuss this assessment.
“And that is part of what the draft of Mueller’s report, I’m told, is to be about,” he said. “We know there has been collusion by [former national security adviser Michael] Flynn. We know there has been collusion of some sort by [Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul] Manafort. The question is, yes, what did the president know and when did he know it?”
In It’s current condition, The United States NEEDS to be destabilized. The the deep state traitors and death cult communist in government need to be arrested, prosecuted and punished and the Constitution, The Constitutional Republic and Rule of Law restored by “whatever means necessary.”
The Communist Democrats currently in power should appreciate that last part.
“Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true.”
– Anonymous
___________
I’ve got news for you, affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, rent control, social services, forced busing, minimum wage, utility subsidies, WIC, TANF, HAMP, HARP, Education, Labor, Obamacare, Obamaphones, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing,” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, regulation beyond commerce, etc., are all irrefutably unconstitutional.
Congress can only tax for “…general Welfare…” and can only regulate “…Commerce among the several states.” The right to private property means Congress has no authority over it – period – no authority – no rent control, minimum wage, non-discrimination, no affirmative action, nothing, period. You can’t grasp the concept and the immutable fundamental law of “American Freedom.” Individual Americans are provided maximal freedom while government is infinitesimal and severely limited and restricted.
___________
The entire communistic American welfare state is unconstitutional. Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto 59 years after the adoption of the Constitution because none of the principles of the Communist Manifesto were in the Constitution. Had the principles of the Communist Manifesto been in the Constitution, Karl Marx would have had no reason to write the Communist Manifesto. The principles of the Communist Manifesto were not in the Constitution then and the principles of the Communist Manifesto are not in the Constitution now.
_________________________________
“Be careful what you wish for, lest it come true.”
– Anonymous
So you’re saying Americans should say good bye to Freedom and the Constitutional Principles, passively sit by wringing their hands in their piss soaked safe space, do nothing and let Themselves be enslaved by the takers and their corrupt power hungry deep state government overlords because they may lose their Obamaphone, have to face reality, man and woman up to real life, have to get a job and learn to support themselves George? Why not correct the situation? Why not base programs on the real welfare of The People instead designing programs that educate the takers how to vote themselves into the position of financial slave owners of others?
As for Social Security leave it only for those who have contributed into it instead of stealing from it to give some 19 year old junkie who never worked a day in his life, lifetime benefits to buy drugs and stay high? Otherwise in the name of politically correct “fairness and equality” start taking from the government union pension funds that net multimillion dollar retirement packages for unfirable, incompetent, worthless destructive civil service parasites and give that to the junkies too. Why not raid the money the unions contribute for political influence and to buy elections to pay for the Obamaphones?
Instead of continuing down the road of insanity and ruin, why not take measures to correct the corruption and right the wrongs?
The Communist paradise promised to the historically ignorant and deluded doesn’t last long once the goal of absolute power is achieved. Absolute Power absolves the Promisers from keeping their promises.
True Communism is designed to preserve, protect and defend the State, not the People. The State will always by first. The American People must learn once again to force their Representives to handle Great Society Programs as well as those other two edged tools Constitutionally and very carefully or force them out and replace them with ones that will. The programs you mentioned are now being used as implements to seize power. If they have to be changed or jettisoned in the name of Constitutional Freedom then so be it. The Democrats are the Asteroid that is going to force this country to start over in an evolved enlightened way or kill us all.
One other tiny little fact The Democrat Socialist/Communist in Congress do not mention.
Communist don’t do parasites. They are counter productive and cost the State.
Communist don’t do welfare for useless eaters.
.
Soviet Constitution ARTICLE 12.
In the U.S.S.R. work is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, in accordance with the principle: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.”
The principle applied in the U.S.S.R. is that of socialism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his work.”
.
This is the provision of the Soviet Constitution that legalized and mandated the extermination by starvation of the poor useless eaters and those who couldn’t work in the gulags and as far as I remember Stalin did not change the Soviet Constitution because it was unpopular, misunderstood or he was accused of racism, sexism, called names or a bunch of screaming whiners dressed in black got together waved signs and set trash cans on fire and made lists of demands for more free stuff.
Try reading with your eyes…not with your mouth.
Article 1, Section 8, referenced above – Congress is provided by the Constitution in Article 1, Section 8 the power to tax merely for “…general Welfare…” and to regulate merely “…Commerce among the several States…” The right to private property denies and precludes any interference in the possession, control, manipulation or disposition of private property by Congress or any other component or level of government.
Congress has NO power to tax for any form of redistribution of wealth or “…individual Welfare…”
Congress has NO power to regulate anything other than “…Commerce among the several States.”
All of these “laws” and/or “programs” are unconstitutional and may only be addressed in the free markets of the private sector, not by Congress or government:
Affirmative action, quotas, welfare, food stamps, rent control, social services, forced busing, minimum wage, utility subsidies, WIC, TANF, HAMP, HARP, Education, Labor, Obamacare, Obamaphones, Social Security, Social Security Disability, Medicare, Medicaid, “Fair Housing,” laws, “Non-Discrimination” laws, regulation beyond commerce, etc.
Obviously, these unconstitutional communist principles have been forcibly imposed on Americans by communists while the Supreme Court is mute, supportive and treasonous.
Any President would be fully justified in seizing power and re-implementing the original Constitution and Bill of Rights, fully abrogating all subsequent, illegal, injurious and unconstitutional amenmdnets and laws.
Dawn, are you posting from a 1950’s time-warp?? Your comments consistently sound like dialogue from “Dr Strangelove”.
P. Hill, you sound like one of those who repeat history completely unaware of the fact they are doing so.
Since I cannot tell if the ignorance in your posts is from astounding stupidity or a profound devotion to a death cult that titilates some sick love of suffering and death of others deep in your psyche, I will just say if you have children and loved ones and have to watch what happens to them because you’re too gutless and stupid to protect them from the deep state coup and everything else happening to American Citizens at warp speed in this Country at the hands of power mad politicians and the death cult political system that you are such a proponent of that is replacing the Constitutional Republic, that is one hell of a badge of honor and one hell of a price you’re willing to pay. Or maybe not. Maybe you’ll like that too.
Carl Bernstein: Mueller Draft Report Shows How Trump ‘Helped Putin Destabilize the United States’
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/carl-bernstein-mueller-draft-report-shows-how-trump-helped-putin-destabilize-the-united-states/
CNN analyst and legendary investigative journalist Carl Berstein appeared on CNN’s Reliable Sources Sunday to talk about two bombshell reports on the Trump administration.
One, from the New York Times, found that the FBI opened a counterintelligence investigation into whether Trump was secretly “working on behalf of Russia against American interests.” And the other, dropped shortly afterwards by the Washington Post, reported that Trump tried to hide his conversations with Russian President Vladimir Putin from senior officials in his own administration.
Bernstein first dismissed Trump’s attempts to claim that “unless there is some type of smoking gun… then there is no collusion.”
“That’s nonsense,” Bernstein said. “This is about the most serious counterintelligence people we have in the U.S. government saying, ‘Oh, my God, the president’s words and actions lead us to conclude that somehow he has become a witting, unwitting, or half-witting pawn, certainly in some regards, to Vladimir Putin.’”
“Look, Trump keeps going back to the idea we need better relations are Russia,” Bernstein continued. “Could be. He could well be right. But from a point of view of strength… rather, he has done what appears to be Putin’s goals. He has helped Putin destabilize the United States and interfere in the election, no matter whether it was purposeful or not.”
“And that is part of what the draft of Mueller’s report, I’m told, is to be about,” Bernstein said. “We know there has been collusion by [Michael] Flynn. We know there has been collusion of some sort by [Paul] Manafort. The question is, yes, what did the president know and when did he know it?”
“What the hell happened in Helsinki!?” he asked, referring to Trump’s meeting with Putin before their joint press conference. “Why is he so beholden?”
“There’s a question of competence,” he concluded. “We do not have an effective governance from the White House right now. We have chaos, misinformation, disinformation, lying.”
https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/24/carl-bernstein-defends-media/
Carl Bernstein Defends The Press: ‘One Of The Great Reporting Jobs In History’
CNN’s Carl Bernstein defended the media on Sunday against criticism of its coverage of President Donald Trump and the Russia probe, saying that the press “has done one of the greatest reporting jobs” in the history of presidential coverage.
“Look, let’s look at where the disinformation and mistakes and lying have come from. It hasn’t come from the press. It’s come from the President of the United States and those around him,” Bernstein said on CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” hosted by Brian Stelter.
“I think we’ve done — the media, the press — has done one of the great reporting jobs in the history, especially of covering a presidency, by the most news organizations,” Bernstein said Sunday.
Turley says: “For years, the public has debated what Assange is: journalist, whistleblower, foreign agent, dupe. The problem is that Assange is first and foremost a publisher.” Says who? I really do think that you, Jon, are interviewing for a job when you publish stuff like this. That is nothing but an argument. Are you tipping Assange or his counsel on what arguments they should make?
WHERE did Assange obtain the material that he published? Was it the result of the normal means by which honest journalists obtain information, such as conducting interviews, taking photos, researching, attending hearings, receiving calls from tipsters, and the like? No, of course not. He published actual, confidential e-mails without the consent of any of the parties to the communications that he knew had been illegally stolen via hacking. Regardless of whether he personally participated in the hacking, where is the First Amendment protection for such conduct? Turley assumes the Constitution protects publication of illegally hacked e-mails. I don’t. Turley also accuses the government of subterfuge in how Assange was charged, to avoid what he claims are the First Amendment protections for publishing stolen confidential communications. Since when do the protections of free speech and freedom of the press extend to hackers who violate confidentiality?
Secondly, if he helped Chelsea Manning hack into the e-mail accounts from which the communications were stolen by breaking down the passwords, then he’s just a thief.
You have a lot to learn.
Murder of Seth Rich – July 10, 2016
“The murder of Seth Rich occurred on Sunday, July 10, 2016, at 4:20 a.m. in the Bloomingdale neighborhood of Washington, D.C. Rich died from two gunshot wounds to the back. He was murdered by unknown perpetrators for unknown reasons,…
The 27-year-old Rich was an employee of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and his murder spawned several…theories…including the…claim that Rich had been involved with the leaked DNC emails in 2016,…”
Julian Assange’s Lawyer Found Dead After Being Struck by Train
August 19, 2016
“John Jones 48, one of Britain’s top human rights lawyers, who represented Julian Assange was killed last Monday, when he was run over by a commuter train. The death is being called a suicide.
British Transport Police were called to the West Hampstead train station in North London at 7:07 AM on Monday April 18, 2016 after a man was struck by a train. He was reportedly pronounced dead at the scene and his death is not being treated as suspicious. The event occurred almost one month to the day that the first batch of Clinton emails were released by his client from WikiLeaks.
Jones worked on the same team as actor, George Clooney’s wife Amal. He specialized in extradition, war crimes and counter-terrorism; taking cases from the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Lebanon and Cambodia.
Jones lived in an expensive home in North London, with wife Misa Zgonec-Rozej, 40 a director of an international law consultancy, and his two children.
The news is particularly disturbing, as Democratic Strategist and CNN host, Bob Beckel appeared in a FOXTV interview and called for the assassination of Julian Assange (or more accurately, “Just kill the sonofabitch!”)
Assange is believed to be planning a strategic “October Surprise” leak of a Hillary Clinton email, just prior the US Presidential Election. It purportedly contains information that will definitively put her behind bars.”
– Alexandra Bruce
http://forbiddenknowledgetv.net/julian-assange-s-lawyer-found-dead-after-being-struck-by-train-27812/
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/jasonleopold/here-are-the-never-before-seen-us-government-damage-reports
This has been reported by multiple sources….I posted this one because it’s concise and deals soley with this downside of a massive security breach involving sensitive, classified information.
The Snowden release of classified material involved some of these same problems, albeit not to the extent that the Manning/WikiLeaks endangered people.
John Oliver confronted Snowden about this disclosure/ endangerment issue in an interview a few years ago.
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/snowden-leaks-oliver-interview
The entire interview is available online.
Thanks, Tom. This is from your article:
“It did, however, have the potential to cause “serious damage” to “intelligence sources, informants and the Afghan population,” and US and NATO intelligence collection efforts. The most significant impact of the leaks, the report concluded, would likely be on the lives of “cooperative Afghans, Iraqis, and other foreign interlocutors.”
……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
Commenters who think Assange is a ‘hero’ have no idea he compromised a number of lives. Somehow that side of the story is completely lost to Hillary Haters who think Assange did the world a favor.
https://jonathanturley.org/2019/04/16/he-is-our-property-the-d-c-establishment-awaits-assange-with-a-glee-and-grudge/comment-page-3/#comment-1843008
Hillary’s no better than Trump.
And Assange has done “the world a favor.”
“He is our property.” Those celebratory words of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va.”
People aren’t property. What a despicable thing to say.
It’s called ‘metaphor’. It won’t hurt you.
It is a lousy metaphor and it is still horrible.
I agree.
“We are still learning more about Assange’s confinement, including bizarre accounts of Assange’s conduct in the Ecaudorian Embassy in London.”
******************
So the discrediting begins by the lapdog media with anonymous or sourceless accounts of bad prior behavior to alienate the prisoner from the citizenry. Then the inevitable leaks from the FBI investigators about the “facts” (usually salacious) as the investigation unfolds. Finally, press accounts on the eve of trial of the case gleaned from “high ranking” sources within the DOJ. The legal trial is but mere afterthought once trial and conviction is had in the court of public opinion.
That will be Assange living by the sword and dying by it
The extent to which the government manipulates the supposedly “free press” is generally underestimated. A lot.
It’s a very sophisticated system!
It isn’t sophisticated at all. Some reporters are dishonest, some are fools, and some are dishonest fools. Some are neither. They stick to local Patch sites and make their real living doing something else or they get out of the business before they’re pushed out.
The CIA routinely embeds or acquires assets in the press. Carl Bernstein for all his flaws gets it:
http://www.carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php
Does Bernstein name names?
Does Deep Throat count?
How about Hillary Doesn’t Swallow?
A couple of reporters and a few news executives.
Just with respect to certain CIA initiatives, I based my assertion on two things:
a) operation mockingbird
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird
b) more importantly, Dulles + Henry Luce = Jackson, this
here is your proof buried in here and salted throughout
https://eisenhower.archives.gov/research/finding_aids/pdf/Jackson_CD_Papers.pdf
below that high level there is plenty of sophisticated manipulation that goes on by “leaks” to the press by government figures right on down to the local clerk who feeds the reporters on the “legal beat” stories and newsflashes
then there are people who manipulate the mass media with false leaks. that is disinformation., they may be private or public. the media gets to be the only people in America who never are tested for sources and attribution, we just have to trust them for it. which allows them to be very lazy and just kind of guess at everything
Mespo, can you identify the very “embedded” entities you just referenced in the list below?
_______________________________________________________________________
The Obama Coup D’etat in America is the most egregious abuse of power and the most prodigious scandal in American political history.
The co-conspirators are:
Rosenstein, Mueller/Team, Comey, McCabe, Strozk, Page, Kadzic, Yates, Baker,
Bruce Ohr, Nellie Ohr, Priestap, Kortan, Campbell, Steele, Simpson, Joseph Mifsud,
Alexander Downer, Stefan “The Walrus” Halper, Kerry, Hillary, Huma, Mills, Brennan,
Clapper, Lerner, Farkas, Power, Lynch, Rice, Jarrett, Sessions, Obama et al.
They’re in the article I cited.
Thank you. It’s difficult to discern the truth; who’s who.
__________________________________________
“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.”
– William Casey, CIA Director 1981-1987
Off Topic –
Mespo, you didn’t answer yesterday – is secession precluded anywhere in the Constitution?
I posed that at the bottom of “The Trolling Of Bill Barr: How Politics Has Outstripped Meaning.”
Thanks.
Secession was believed to be a state’s right at the time of signing the Constitution and the time of the Civil War. I don’t think that’s all the controversial a point George.
But Lincoln and the Yankee army made a forceful legal case that it was not allowed. Legal case argued with war. The Congress ratified their belief with the amendments passed after the outcome.
Secession is one of those political questions which is only answerable with force.
You can’t take law out of politics nor politics out of law. Law emerges as the rules for imposition of organized violence by the ruling gang of whatever city existed in the first place.
That’s the alpha of law. And the omega is that same force of organized violence which breathed life into it in the first place.
Today what secessions are allowed? Are those which can be supported with force. As in Kosovo withdrawing from Serbia, or Crimea withdrawing from Ukraine. Both, essentially legal, in the most basic sense of the world.
NATO pretends one was legal and the other was not. Putin, sly fox, says that if Kosovo was legal than so was Crimea. He’s a boss!
Mr. Kurtz, Lincoln having set the precedent of violating the Constitution, seizing power and ruling as a dictator by executive order, any president would be fully justified in seizing power, abrogating the unconstitutional acts of Lincoln, including any and all follow-on, subsequent acts such as unconstitutional and injurious amendments and amendments improperly ratified under the duress of post-war military occupation, and fully restoring the limited and severely restricted, infinitesimal government provided for by the “manifest tenor” of the Constitution. The entire American welfare state would be rescinded and fully abrogated.
Secession is not precluded. Obviously, that which is not enumerated is precluded and that which is not precluded is permitted. That which is omitted is conceded. Secession, that which the Founders engaged in wholeheartedly and personally and at the risk of a cruel execution, is not precluded and is, thereby, granted by the natural and God-given rights and freedoms deliberately provided to Americans by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, with emphasis on the 9th Amendment, as those very same documents simultaneously established infinitesimal, limited and severely restricted government.
Abraham Lincoln’s authority as President was established by the Constitution and, as President, Lincoln was required by that very Constitution to not legislate but execute the withdrawal of forces from the territory of a seceded and sovereign foreign nation and stand down. Subsequent acts by Lincoln and acts stemming from those subsequent acts by his successors are illegitimate and without legal and/or constitutional basis.
George:
No it’s not precluded in the text. It’s been shown to be unlawful by virtue of that famous case that ran from 1861-1865 and was loosely referred to as USA v. CSA. It’s the doctrine of Casus Belli. Romans had great names for things!
Mespo,
Thank you.
Secession is not precluded. Obviously, that which is not enumerated is precluded and that which is not precluded is permitted. That which is omitted is conceded. Secession, that which the Founders engaged in wholeheartedly and personally and at the risk of a cruel execution, is not precluded and is, thereby, granted by the natural and God-given rights and freedoms deliberately provided to Americans by the Constitution and Bill of Rights, with emphasis on the 9th Amendment, as those very same documents simultaneously established infinitesimal, limited and severely restricted government.
Abraham Lincoln’s authority as President was established by the Constitution and, as President, Lincoln was required by that very Constitution to not legislate but execute the withdrawal of forces from the territory of a seceded and sovereign foreign nation and stand down. Subsequent acts by Lincoln and acts stemming from those subsequent acts by his successors are illegitimate and without legal and/or constitutional basis.
If I thought it would be given consideration, I would reiterate a recommendation to obtain, for perspective, “Crimes and Cover-ups in American Politics: 1776-1963” Hardcover – Donald Jeffries – June 18, 2019
“Deep Throat II”
_____________
“Two men drove up to my mailbox late at night and told me that the government had been weaponized against President Trump.”
– John F. Solomon, The Hill
“It’s a very sophisticated system!”
Yes. And most people don’t get it.
Here’s the title of the USA Today article:
“WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange will be punished for embarrassing the DC establishment”
Jonathan Turley, Opinion columnist Published 10:56 a.m. ET April 11, 2019 | Updated 12:18 p.m. ET April 12, 2019
Assange is not his real birth name.
He’s a fruit, he’s a fruit…
He’s a fruit all the way.
From his first fag input..
To his last dying day.
“Bring It On”: Julian Assange’s 2015 Message to the U.S. Justice Department About Possible Charges
https://www.democracynow.org/2019/4/11/bring_it_on_julian_assanges_2015
AMY GOODMAN: We’re going to end with Julian Assange in his own words. This is when I went to London and interviewed him in the Ecuadorean Embassy in 2015.
JULIAN ASSANGE: The U.S. government, in terms of its attack on WikiLeaks, has tried to construct a theory which, if permitted, will be the end of national security journalism, not just in the United States, but also about the United States. That claim is that journalists can’t solicit information from sources and to solicit information is to be involved in a conspiracy. And—
AMY GOODMAN: An accomplice to the conspiracy.
JULIAN ASSANGE: Yeah. And the United States, in terms of the charge types that it’s trying to charge me with—those include conspiracy and conspiracy to commit espionage—this is rubbish. We cannot tolerate this at the political level or the media level. If we do tolerate it, then that standard will be erected. Then what happens in practice? How does traditional investigative journalism work? Well, you hear a rumor about some event occurring. Let’s say it’s an assassination squad assassinating people. You hear a rumor that there might have been an event, and you go and speak to your sources, or perhaps one approaches you and says, “I heard that this happened.” And then you say, “Well, that’s good, but we need to be able to prove it. So do you have information that can prove it?” And then they say, “Well, I think I might have some report on the incident.” And then you say, “Well, that’s good. Can we have that report? Can we see that report?” And that’s the way journalism has always been done. Now, the U.S. DOJ—
AMY GOODMAN: That’s the smoking gun.
JULIAN ASSANGE: That’s the smoking gun. That’s—if you see the Edward Snowden case, without that, without those documents, you don’t get anywhere. If you’ve got that, then they’re undeniable, if they’re official documents. So, we cannot allow a standard to be erected, in national security journalism or other forms of investigative journalism, where that is not permitted, where that is seen to be unlawful. And a number of journalists, as a result of the DOJ pushing this line that it is unlawful to solicit tips from sources, have been—to protect themselves, they have said that they’re not. But as a result, a new standard is being erected—is in danger of being erected, where you cannot solicit tips from sources.
Now, we even fell into this mistake back in 2011, 2012, where our situation was quite precarious. Based on legal advice, WikiLeaks doesn’t solicit information. In fact, WikiLeaks is one of the few organizations, because of our infrastructure, that we do often get unsolicited information. But we think it’s necessary to hold the line and say, “No, asking for tips is a very important thing to do. It’s always been done in journalism.” And we’re going to show that we do that. We are confident about doing that. We are confident that that is legal, under most judicial systems, and it should be legal also in the United States—we say it is legal under the First Amendment. And if the U.S. DOJ wants to have a fight about that in relation to the TPP or anything else, then bring it on.
AMY GOODMAN: WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange, speaking at the Ecuadorean Embassy, where he was in political exile, in 2015. To see all our interviews with him there, as well as a public event we did in London when he was out on bail but wearing the ankle monitor, along with the philosopher Slavoj Zizek, you can go to democracynow.org. Again, the latest breaking news: The British police have gone into the Ecuadorean Embassy, at the invitation of the Ecuadorean president, and arrested Julian Assange. He is now in the central jail in London.
““Bring It On”: Julian Assange’s 2015 Message to the U.S. Justice Department About Possible Charges”
One of the reasons we hired an outsider was to destroy the left and the other was to expose the left. The counter revolution against Anti Constitutionalists is proving we self governing citizens and constitutional centrist are did and are doing the correct thing as US citizens against these foreign ideologists.
“Notably, no one went to jail or was fired for the surveillance programs. Those in charge of failed congressional oversight were reelected. Clapper was never charged with perjury. Even figures shown to have lied in the Clinton emails, like former CNN commentator Donna Brazile (who lied about giving Clinton’s campaign questions in advance of the presidential debates), are now back on television. Assange, however, could well do time.”
That is unjust. The law is supposed to apply equally to all, and it doesn’t. Everyone is supposed to be held accountable for their actions, but they aren’t.
If Assange broke the law, then the law should apply to him justly. If others broke the law, in positions of power in government, the same goes for them.
This will be a very interesting case, unless the government silences him. It is very concerning that the government may muzzle his defense. The people of the United States have a right to know what he has to say. Everyone should have their day in court when charged, but he’s not really given the opportunity to defend himself if he is silenced.
I do not know if he participated in hacking, himself, or if he simply published information like any other journalist. Very interested to see how this goes.
Assange is an equal-oppourtunity prankster, who will put Ben-Gay in anyone’s jock-strap. For the prosecutocracy and the media to indulge you, you have to confine yourself to Republican jock-straps.
He can fire his lawyer and go pro se and then say whatever he likes. That almost always is a mistake. But it happens all the time with guys who know better than their lawyers. They’re a dime a dozen., I doubt he’s that stupid. But we will see
Dr. Kevorkian argued his last case pro se. Creepy old serial killer was finally convicted.
good example. he did better with the lawyer, was it geoff feigher? i cant remember
today they are slipping people lethal doses a lot more than they used to. you don’t use a machine though, that’s what got him in trouble. they just write a really heavy pain scrip to hospice and then BOOM lights out