What should Julian Assange be charged with?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Nothing.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

So, my question to everybody who says, "Nothing." ... should the U.S. not charge people with espionage?  And if we do, how are those people any different than Assange?

Uh, Inks and cinyc and don, the guy who allegedly gave him this stuff is being charged.  

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

So, my question to everybody who says, "Nothing." ... should the U.S. not charge people with espionage?  And if we do, how are those people any different than Assange?

Uh, Inks and cinyc, the guy who allegedly gave him this stuff is being charged.  

What Assange has done is still clearly covered under U.S. Code Chapter 37, Section 793...

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/uscode/18/I/37/793

So the U.S. decides if the information "injures" the U.S.?  Convenient.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

So, my question to everybody who says, "Nothing." ... should the U.S. not charge people with espionage?  And if we do, how are those people any different than Assange?

Uh, Inks and cinyc and don, the guy who allegedly gave him this stuff is being charged.  

As he should be.  But that doesn't absolve Assange from any liability should he ever be caught.
 
Like other foreign spies, Assange might never be caught- but that's a totally different issue.

Anyone........has the U.S. called for his arrest?

I'll answer my own question - The White House apparently isn't.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Gramps, section (e) states:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Surely there's reason to believe that this information that was leaked could be used to the injury of the U.S.  Even if Assange didn't have the intent to injure the U.S., he can still be charged.

So the U.S. decides if the information "injures" the U.S.?  Convenient.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Inks, I"m being serious here, why isn't Gibbs or Obama himself calling for his arrest and deportation to the U.S.?  Or did they and I missed it?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Inks, I"m being serious here, why isn't Gibbs or Obama himself calling for his arrest and deportation to the U.S.?  Or did they and I missed it?

The Justice Department is still in an ongoing investigation... I think it'd be premature for the administration to announce their intent before they have conclusively decided what he'll be charged with.

But you guys have conclusively decided what he should be charged with.

I have too.....nothing.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

It is. Our constitution is pretty clear that what Mr Assange is doing counts as Freedom of Speech. The crime is commited  by the people who leak the information to him.

Which is also true under US law. See the publishing of the Pentagon Papers or Bob Novak exposing Valerie Plame. Neither the NY Times or Novak broke any laws.

How does what Assange did not fall under the statute that I cited?

Let's just stipulate that it does, to make you guys happy and let's call him a spy............so what?  Under the statute, every spy overseas from every foreign country could be charged, because every country friend and foe is spying on us and obtaining documents......it's just the grand scale of his document dump and the others that gauls some here.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

And every spy should be charged (although they'd be charged under more serious statutes, since the intent there is clear).  It's just that most people who violate the law aren't stupid enough to put their name and face out there saying, "Look what I did!"

Shoot the messenger, eh?  I love how the venom isn't flowing toward the person or persons who gave him all of this stuff.....

He may go down as the greatest whistleblower in history.....I don't think he has any vendetta against the U.S......hell he'd jump at the chance to publish this stuff about any country.....

Intent to inure is very vague, Inks.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I love how our Israeli allies reacted to the big leak:

From the AP:

"Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, meanwhile, said the WikiLeaks disclosure of U.S.-led diplomatic efforts to curb Iran's nuclear program vindicated his stance that Iran was the chief threat to peace in the region."

I didn't see any quotes where Bebe condemend the dump......actually, Israel will likely make good use of it.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Truth-telling. It's illegal in the U.S. now, isn't it?

Only if the intent is to injure the U.S.......

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

LOL, "espionage", "treason", "foreign spy".  Good luck getting him extradited to a country that still has a federal death penalty for such offenses, guys.

Who said anything about extradition?  There are plenty of ways governments deal with foreign spies, many times not by hauling them into court.

So you're advocating assassination?

Uh, that or GITMOesque living quarters...

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Ok, Inks, did you support an effort inside of Germany to indict Donald Rumsfeld, George J. Tenet, former Central Intelligence Agency director; Stephen A. Cambone, undersecretary of defense for intelligence; David Addington, Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff; Lieutenant General Ricardo Sanchez, former commander of US forces in Iraq; and Colonel Thomas Pappas, the former top intelligence official in Iraq for war crimes?

If the indictment would have been issued, should we have loaded them on a plane and sent them to be tried, or now, since they're all retired, if German charges them with war crimes, what do we do?  They might be guilty under German law......."German law provides "universal jurisdiction," allowing for the prosecution of war crimes committed anywhere, said Rattner, who is in Berlin preparing the case."

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

A very good analysis by WaPo

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

I believe whoever is leaking things to him is probably breaking his NDA that he signed.

And I'm not content to think it's some lowly service man leaking it.......I think he has a very high placed source.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

The state shouldn't exist?  Pure anarchy doesn't work.

Well it does, but that's not the pertinent issue here. Let's focus on why the State is addicted to committing crimes and then arresting people for exposing said crimes.

What crimes were committed as evidenced by this release of documents?

Well, here is an interesting question.

Somebody sends me a secret document, directly, in the mail.  I scan it, and place it online.  I probably can't be charged with espionage.

Maybe, publishing secret documents, but what if it's from China?  I have not broken any US laws.  Do I have an obligation to obey the laws of another country that I've never visited?  I didn't hack a computer in China; I was just sitting in my house when the mail showed up.

If it's a document that's property of the U.S., you can be charged.  That doesn't mean you'll be extradited...

For what?  The document showed up.  I didn't steal it?

That doesn't matter.  Both 18 U.S.C. § 798 and 793 have sections that say you can be charged for either posession or even the transmission and/ or publication of classified documents.

And I think that's going to be your first amendment issue.

Even if he argues that, he can still be charged under 793 for conspiracy to commit (although there's no ctc clause in 798).

Inks, the WaPo article I linked even suggested first amendment issue might trump this stuff and the Feds will be careful on this, trust me.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Inks, what should the newspapers who publish or link to wikileaks get charged with?

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Inks, what should the newspapers who publish or link to wikileaks get charged with?

Since wikileaks has been shut down, I'd imagine nothing.

So don't charge Assange if that's the case, right?