this post was submitted on 06 Oct 2023
106 points (83.1% liked)
Videos
6173 readers
4 users here now
Neat vids from youtube or wherever. Rules later
founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Remember: the indictment of Julian relates to 2010-2011 publications only: the Afghanistan War Logs, Iraq War Logs, Diplomatic Cables, Guantanamo Bay Detainee Briefs. The charges have nothing to do with the 2016 release of Podesta/Clinton’s emails, or with Russia.
The 18 count indictment: https://www.justice.gov/d9/press-releases/attachments/2020/06/24/06_24_20_returned_redacted_foreperson_name_0.pdf
The Assange High Court appeal (UK) application as blocked by Justice Swift: https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/wp/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/assangehighcourtappeal.pdf
And the specific allegation is that Assange assisted in the hack not that he received the info.
No.
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-charged-18-count-superseding-indictment
Yes
You've got to read the indictment itself, not the doj's spin misrepresentation of it. A press release is not an indictment and is not what counts in court.
The press release explains what their allegations are. The DOJ is not going to misrepresent their own indictment. The DOJ alleges he aided Manning in their hack.
actually, that's exactly what they're doing. Misrepresenting their allegations which, btw, have been debunked by computer experts in the UK court.
Lol that isn't how courts work.