Jump to content

Assange Arrested

Fudge Nuggets

By Fudge Nuggets
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13725

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, FUBAR said:

Would Trump just pardon him and take the DOJ off the hook?

I’m not sure that pardoning a co-criminal of  Chelsea Manning would go over well with his base. 

Not that they would turn on trump but little upside for him. 

The big unknown problem is what Assange knows about the 2016 election. Assange seems like he’s the type to turn on anyone once he faces jail time without the internet and Pam Anderson. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, triplehorn said:

It's unfortunate for Assange that it appears he also chose to be a Russian Intelligence Service asset.  Meanwhile his contemporary Snowden is hiding in a country with no real freedom of speech, privacy protections, or rule of law. 

Sucks to be RU.

 

 

This is deranged. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, David Dennison said:

Why not?

Because witnesses of government wrongdoing will be deterred from leaking and others in a position to publish leaked information will be deterred from doing so, making it less likely that governmental wrongdoing will be exposed in the future.  

Quote

While on the surface it appears the Justice Department attempted to circumvent many of the First Amendment issues, which discouraged President Barack Obama’s administration from moving forward with an indictment of Assange, the language in the indictment—dated March 6, 2018—is very similar to what prosecutors typically include in indictments against individuals charged with violating the Espionage Act.

The indictment criminalizes Assange as an “aider” and “abettor” of “espionage” for publishing unauthorized disclosures of classified information on the WikiLeaks website.

“The WikiLeaks website publicly solicited submissions of classified, censored, and other restricted information,” the indictment states. “Assange, who did not possess a security clearance or need to know, was not authorized to receive classified information of the United States.”

Reporters or editors for media organizations publish stories based upon on leaks of classified information all the time and typically do not have security clearances.

If a precedent were set where journalists had to possess a security clearance, it would create a threat for any reporter relying upon such information to expose abuses of power or corruption committed by the U.S. government, including but not limited to security agencies.

More significantly, Assange holds citizenship in Australia and was also granted citizenship by Ecuador a little over one year ago. Invoking secrecy regulations in the U.S. as part of an indictment against someone who is not an American citizen carries implications for world press freedom.

https://shadowproof.com/2019/04/11/justice-department-charges-julian-assange-with-computer-crime-but-alleges-conspiracy-to-abet-espionage/

I would bet the reason they have stuck Chelsea in solitary is to try to torture her into a confession that assists the prosecution of Assange.  She's been in solitary for over a month now.  Really sick shit.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
27 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

This is deranged. 

The consensus of own IC is that Wikileaks is a RIS cutout.  fact.

Under Putin, RU is a country with no real freedom of speech, privacy protections, or due process when confronting, or being in opposition to Putin.  fact.

Would it help you if I typed in Cyrillic ?

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28512

Posted
Posted (edited)
25 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Because witnesses of government wrongdoing will be deterred from leaking and others in a position to publish leaked information will be deterred from doing so, making it less likely that governmental wrongdoing will be exposed in the future.  

https://shadowproof.com/2019/04/11/justice-department-charges-julian-assange-with-computer-crime-but-alleges-conspiracy-to-abet-espionage/

I would bet the reason they have stuck Chelsea in solitary is to try to torture her into a confession that assists the prosecution of Assange.  She's been in solitary for over a month now.  Really sick shit.  

So there's a few critically important key differences between the Manning case and the Assange case. Manning was charged under the UCMJ as a servicemember, which has a drastically different set of rules and rights for defendants when contrasted with civilian law. They even use a different set of courts from non-military law. I think that's SUPER important to keep in mind, especially when comparing to assange. 

Furthermore, her conviction under the espionage act and CFAA (which granted, both are problematic laws generally, but I think they were applied appropriately in this case) was upheld by the US Army Court of Appeals, and it was just that her punishment was commuted.

She was called in to testify via a subpoena in connection to a case that she was charged and convicted of, and after denying their lawful subpoena, is held in contempt. 

She was not put in solitary, in the exact same way that Manafort wasn't put into solitary. They were put into administrative segregation - which means they only interact with prison LEO's, and not with the rest of the prisoner population. They still have access to social visits, recreation, and the other privileges prisoners typically have. Furthermore, she was released into genpop just last week.

You really do seem to be pumping out a breathtaking level of FUD about this though. You should try using facts next time you post.

Edited by Captainant
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23367

Posted
Posted

WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy

Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer.

According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States.

The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications.  Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks.  Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her.  Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures.

During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange.  The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information.  During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.”  To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”

Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  He faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison if convicted.  Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.  A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers, U.S. Attorney G. Zachary Terwilliger for the Eastern District of Virginia and Assistant Director in Charge Nancy McNamara of the FBI’s Washington Field Office made the announcement after the charges were unsealed.  First Assistant U.S. Attorney Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kellen S. Dwyer, Thomas W. Traxler and Gordon D. Kromberg, and Trial Attorneys Matthew R. Walczewski and Nicholas O. Hunter of the Justice Department’s National Security Division are prosecuting the case.

The extradition will be handled by the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs.

An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime.  Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court.

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28512

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy

Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer.

According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States.

The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications.  Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks.  Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her.  Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures.

During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange.  The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information.  During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.”  To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”

Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.  He faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison if convicted.  Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties.  A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.

Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers, U.S. Attorney G. Zachary Terwilliger for the Eastern District of Virginia and Assistant Director in Charge Nancy McNamara of the FBI’s Washington Field Office made the announcement after the charges were unsealed.  First Assistant U.S. Attorney Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kellen S. Dwyer, Thomas W. Traxler and Gordon D. Kromberg, and Trial Attorneys Matthew R. Walczewski and Nicholas O. Hunter of the Justice Department’s National Security Division are prosecuting the case.

The extradition will be handled by the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs.

An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime.  Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court.

 

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy

hugo, love ya, but you're a page behind on posting that lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32072

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, David Dennison said:

You don't like the federal government but you want the federal government more involved in the lives of its citizens.

That is a conundrum.

I guess he wants California's government to run all the shit he wants?  Maybe Minnesota?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28512

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

How would Assange "assist" Manning in cracking a password?

lol this is nonsense

"Have you tried 'ABC1234'?"

Social engineering is a real thing my dude. In the DOJ statement, they clearly state that Assange was working with Manning to crack another user's password so they could obfuscate their extraction of classified materials. That could mean a billion different discrete actions being taken by Assange, but it's something that Manning was already charged and convicted of. So the direct testimony of their literal partner in crime as to what discrete actions were taken would absolutely be an important and critical piece of corroborating information in the indictment against assange.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted
Just now, Captainant said:

Social engineering is a real thing my dude. In the DOJ statement, they clearly state that Assange was working with Manning to crack another user's password so they could obfuscate their extraction of classified materials. That could mean a billion different discrete actions being taken by Assange, but it's something that Manning was already charged and convicted of. So the direct testimony of their literal partner in crime as to what discrete actions were taken would absolutely be an important and critical piece of corroborating information in the indictment against assange.

Sure, and I'd need to know what that means before giving a crap or thinking Assange actually did anything wrong.

I do not trust the military or intelligence agencies at all. Not all libs worship cops.

They're trying to torture testimony out of Manning right now.

This is an outrage, but hey... whatever, we love our authoritarian power!

(SUPER BRAIN: "Heh if you don't like totalitarian authority then you must oppose providing healthcare to the poor and elderly.")

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32072

Posted
Posted

Besides the Trump DOJ probably not giving a fuck about the 1st Amendment, there seems to be a difference between what they are charging Assange with now (actual complicity in hacking/espionage) vs. then (mere publication of the fruits of hacking/espionage).  As long as the complicity rises above mere publication (even with complete knowledge of the unlawful source), I don't see any 1st amendment issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted

And if "assisting a hack" is nothing more than "encouraging the release of information" then RIP meaningful journalism.

The specifics of how Assange supposedly assisted Manning matter a lot.

As much as I dislike the guy, I have no idea how it makes sense that he was helping someone far more technically proficient than him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Just like to point out to the Assange defenders that Assange promised to turn himself over to US authorities if Obama pardoned Manning.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.theregister.co.uk/AMP/2017/01/20/assange_stays_put_post_manning/

He’s a lying POS. 

There are valid reasons to dislike Julian Assange a lot.

Refusing to turn himself over to a corrupt, torturing, and unaccountable international police agency is NOT one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28512

Posted
Posted
Just now, bad_teammate said:

And if "assisting a hack" is nothing more than "encouraging the release of information" then RIP meaningful journalism.

The specifics of how Assange supposedly assisted Manning matter a lot.

As much as I dislike the guy, I have no idea how it makes sense that he was helping someone far more technically proficient than him.

From what DOJ has shared publicly so far, it would seem that Assange did more than just say "you should pull this info". The term "cracking a password" usually means in infosec that you bruteforced a password or sniffed a login credential to gain access to a system through a means you are not authorized to use. That is pretty cut and dry. 

Additionally by having in black and white text communications that assange was encouraging her to steal more info and share it with him, that establishes a conspiracy in connection with the password cracking. Which is why assange is facing a "federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer".

Jesus christ, you're the liberal equivalent of anastasia with all of the whataboutism and pearl clutching about plainly damning facts.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SuingToGetAMessageBoard?

SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

And if "assisting a hack" is nothing more than "encouraging the release of information" then RIP meaningful journalism.

The specifics of how Assange supposedly assisted Manning matter a lot.

As much as I dislike the guy, I have no idea how it makes sense that he was helping someone far more technically proficient than him.

This is the real galaxy brain insight. Anger that he was arrested.  Not knowing why he was arrested. And RIP journalism to boot.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19519

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Fozzz said:

Because witnesses of government wrongdoing will be deterred from leaking and others in a position to publish leaked information will be deterred from doing so, making it less likely that governmental wrongdoing will be exposed in the future.  

I guess sometimes two wrongs do make a right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TwiceHorn

TwiceHorn 32072

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Captainant said:

From what DOJ has shared publicly so far, it would seem that Assange did more than just say "you should pull this info". The term "cracking a password" usually means in infosec that you bruteforced a password or sniffed a login credential to gain access to a system through a means you are not authorized to use. That is pretty cut and dry. 

Additionally by having in black and white text communications that assange was encouraging her to steal more info and share it with him, that establishes a conspiracy in connection with the password cracking. Which is why assange is facing a "federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer".

Jesus christ, you're the liberal equivalent of anastasia with all of the whataboutism and pearl clutching about plainly damning facts.

There's no need to speculate about what Assange is indicted for.  It's right here, wherein it is alleged that Assange actively assisted Manning in attempting to crack a password to and stored on a DOD computer.  That is the conspiracy and the unlawful act, ultimately committed by Manning, but with the agreement and assistance of Assange.

The rest of it raises First Amendment concerns.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted
35 minutes ago, Captainant said:

From what DOJ has shared publicly so far, it would seem that Assange did more than just say "you should pull this info". The term "cracking a password" usually means in infosec that you bruteforced a password or sniffed a login credential to gain access to a system through a means you are not authorized to use. That is pretty cut and dry. 

If there's evidence that he helped teach Chelsea Manning how to hack into a system then that's evidence of a crime, but we haven't seen that evidence. All we have is the accusation. An accusation I do not trust without substantiating evidence given how dishonest our intelligence and military communities are.

21 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:
David Duke and bad_teammate can come together on something, remarkable.

I'm not the one spreading (((secret money conspiracies))) about a Jewish person I don't like. Check the mirror, anti-Semite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 19519

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

If there's evidence that he helped teach Chelsea Manning how to hack into a system then that's evidence of a crime, but we haven't seen that evidence. All we have is the accusation. An accusation I do not trust without substantiating evidence given how dishonest our intelligence and military communities are.

That's what trials are for. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
TornACL

TornACL 7792

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

Was he literally inside of the embassy for 7 years?  Like, he doesn't go to the store or the movies or go jogging or anything?

Clearly he never ran to the bodega to pick up some razors. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28512

Posted
Posted
38 minutes ago, F250 said:

Apparently this jabber discussion is where Assange offered assistance. It's not much assistance but it's all the government needs to hit Assange with the CFAA.

 

I mean, that's Assange offering to do a rainbow table attack against a hashed password to figure out the real password. That's literally - in a technical nuts and bolts level - helping to crack a password into a classified computer system lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted
58 minutes ago, F250 said:

Apparently this jabber discussion is where Assange offered assistance. It's not much assistance but it's all the government needs to hit Assange with the CFAA.

 

lol idiots

A potential defense of "Oh, uh, a friend just asked me about cracking a hash and I thought it was probably some kind of fun game! I didn't know it was a password!" is out the window with Manning volunteering and then Assange asking for confirmation that it's from a SAM.

Shitty OpSec'll get ya every time.

Even if all of that is true in context and that has actually represents what the gov't says it represents, I don't care.  I'm glad people are trying to hack secret information and get truth out. Our world would be a lot better off if more people spent time blowing up the secret, deadly intrigues of our governments.

Illegal? Sure, whatever, do a fair and open trial and give the people sane, non-cruel, non-tortuous jail time. But I like it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
F250

F250 29195

Posted
Posted
Just now, bad_teammate said:

lol idiots

A potential defense of "Oh, uh, a friend just asked me about cracking a hash and I thought it was probably some kind of fun game! I didn't know it was a password!" is out the window with Manning volunteering and then Assange asking for confirmation that it's from a SAM.

Shitty OpSec'll get ya every time.

Even if all of that is true in context and that has actually represents what the gov't says it represents, I don't care.  I'm glad people are trying to hack secret information and get truth out. Our world would be a lot better off if more people spent time blowing up the secret, deadly intrigues of our governments.

Illegal? Sure, whatever, do a fair and open trial and give the people sane, non-cruel, non-tortuous jail time. But I like it.

Yeah this was really dumb and I think it speaks to Chelsea being a genuine whistleblower rather than a malicious hacker. Dumping a SAM database and cracking the hashes is Little League level hacking. Any of the high school students I used to train could do this without assistance.

I agree with your sentiment. I am glad there are people exposing secrets that the government covers up. The thing that infuriates me is all of the attention is put on the whistleblower instead of the government actors doing nefarious shit.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13496

Posted
Posted

Basically everything that happens makes me like Chelsea more.

Still don't like Assange though, so I don't really care what happens to him.

We need to get Chelsea the fuck out of solitary confinement. I hate these monsters. Fuck the military and intelligence agencies. All day, every day, and forever.

  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 28512

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Basically everything that happens makes me like Chelsea more.

Still don't like Assange though, so I don't really care what happens to him.

We need to get Chelsea the fuck out of solitary confinement. I hate these monsters. Fuck the military and intelligence agencies. All day, every day, and forever.

CHELSEA IS NOT IN SOLITARY CONFINEMENT YOU IGNORANT FUCKSTICK. I've linked the evidence to support that multiple times in this fucking thread

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fozzz

Fozzz 152

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

3 hours ago, Captainant said:

So there's a few critically important key differences between the Manning case and the Assange case. Manning was charged under the UCMJ as a servicemember, which has a drastically different set of rules and rights for defendants when contrasted with civilian law. They even use a different set of courts from non-military law. I think that's SUPER important to keep in mind, especially when comparing to assange. 

Furthermore, her conviction under the espionage act and CFAA (which granted, both are problematic laws generally, but I think they were applied appropriately in this case) was upheld by the US Army Court of Appeals, and it was just that her punishment was commuted.

She was called in to testify via a subpoena in connection to a case that she was charged and convicted of, and after denying their lawful subpoena, is held in contempt. 

She was not put in solitary, in the exact same way that Manafort wasn't put into solitary. They were put into administrative segregation - which means they only interact with prison LEO's, and not with the rest of the prisoner population. They still have access to social visits, recreation, and the other privileges prisoners typically have. Furthermore, she was released into genpop just last week.

You really do seem to be pumping out a breathtaking level of FUD about this though. You should try using facts next time you post.

lol she's placed in isolation for 22 hours a day.

Quote

The “administrative segregation” policy for the detention center—as outlined in an inmate handbook from July 2017—is to house an individual for up to 22 hours per day. A break is given on an established schedule that typically lasts for two hours. A person can “make personal phone calls” and “attend” to “hygiene needs.”

According to Chelsea Resists, Manning has been granted a break every day from 1 am to 3 am. She vomited during their 45-minute visit because the stimulation of being outside of her 22-hour lockdown made her nauseous.

Manning is in the same facility as Maria Butina and Paul Manafort, two other “high-profile” detainees who have been held for months in similarly harsh conditions.

Alexandria Sheriff Dana Lawhorne insists this is not solitary confinement. Individuals confined at the facility in “administrative segregation” have “access to visits, books, and recreation.”

Yet Solitary Watch, a U.S. watchdog organization that monitors widespread use of solitary confinement in U.S. prisons and jails, defines solitary confinement as “the practice of isolating people in closed cells for 22-24 hours a day, virtually free of human contact, for periods of time ranging from days to decades.”

https://shadowproof.com/2019/03/25/chelsea-manning-once-again-in-solitary-and-denied-due-process-to-challenge-mistreatment/

Not torture, she's actually having a blast.

Edited by Fozzz
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...