Re: Don't shoot messenger for revealing uncomfortable truths

I bring up "the sex thing" because I'm curious why no other charges have yet
been filed against him.  What with him being such a horrible criminal and all,
I'd think he would have been charged with a relevant crime by now.
 
**And he may still be.  I see no relevance either way.  US officials are trying
to decide how to respond.  I fully expect nothing to happen, while I also expect
Manning to be Court Martialed where he *could* face the death penalty (though I
doubt it).
Perhaps it is because in the last major case our government tried to prosecute
the publishers of leaked information, the Supreme Court sided with my over the
top defense, 6-3.
**again, if Manning broke the law by leaking the documents, and Assange
conspired with him, that is different than if someone publishes it.  I am not
saying he did, but that will be investigated and could result in a different set
of conditions.
**This is not as simple as it appears.
Perhaps it is because prosecuting WikiLeaks means also prosecuting several
international newspapers, who are publishing most of the leaks before WikiLeaks
does.
**not necessarily.  It really depends on who leaked to whom.  If Assange was the
primary person Manning leaked to and Assange leaked to others that also changes
it.
A Congressional Research Service report stated that "there is ample statutory
authority" for a prosecution. But it goes on to say: "...we are aware of no case
in which a publisher of information obtained through unauthorized disclosure by
a government employee has been prosecuted for publishing it. There may be First
Amendment implications that would make such a prosecution difficult, not to
mention political ramifications based on concerns about government censorship.
To the extent that the investigation implicates any foreign nationals whose
conduct occurred entirely overseas, any resulting prosecution may carry foreign
policy implications related to the exercise of extraterritorial jurisdiction."
**Sorry, to me this is another abuse of the 1st Amendment.
Essentially, CRS found that a plausible reading of the Espionage Act, by itself,
might find some grounds to charge Assange --but that precedent, the
Constitution, and jurisdictional issues all weigh against a successful
prosecution.
So if my defense is over the top, at least I have the legal bits of it in common
with 6 Supreme Court Justices and the Congressional Research Service.
**your defense is over the top when you use the comparisons about the Military
like you did.

-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot