Excerpt:

The United States is considering a plea deal that would allow WikiLeaks founder and whistleblower Julian Assange to return to Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald reported Monday.

U.S. Ambassador to Australia Caroline Kennedy told the Morning Herald that there could be a “resolution” to Assange’s now-four-year detention in Britain. Assange, an Australian citizen, has been held in a London prison since 2019 while combating U.S. extradition efforts. He faces 18 criminal charges in the U.S., 17 of which allege violations of the Espionage Act.

  • Five@beehaw.orgOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    There were some very deluded people during the Trump years who thought Assange would get special treatment for his vendetta against Hillary Clinton helping to get Trump elected. But you nailed it right on the head – killing press freedoms and not paying debts are even bigger parts of Donald’s brand than gaudy letters on the sides of buildings.

    But don’t get it twisted. Then Secretary of State Clinton went hard against Assange, and it did look bad for press freedoms in the US. You have to remember the State Department did not take press freedom seriously at all, abusing the espionage act left and right. They put more journalists sources in prison than any other previous president. They went after journalists families, like when they detained Glenn Greenwald’s partner in Heathrow. That should always be remembered as part of Barack Obama’s legacy.

    The Trump “Fake News” era was absolutely devastating to journalism, so it’s easy to see Obama’s administration through rose tinted glasses. But it’s important to remember the damage they did that contributed to where we are today.

    • Hot Saucerman
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Now now, I am not saying Obama or Biden administrations are paragons of freedom of press, but a lot of that had very little directly to do with Assange’s case.

      Greenwald’s partner, for example, had far more to do with the US trying to catch Snowden. They brought down a foreign Presidents plane to try to catch Snowden, no less.

      My point is simply that the Grand Jury that was impaneled to look at Assange during the Obama years chose not to prosecute because they couldn’t disentangle other media outlets. If they charged Assange, it would be open season on the New York Times, which also published the documents. I think that was a wise decision.

      Now the US establishment was all too happy to smear Assange during this time, especially in regards to the Swedish case and his claims of worries of extradition, but legally, they didn’t actually pursue him, for valid reasons. Legal pursuit came during the Trump administration, which was happy to destroy the future of press freedoms tenfold.

        • Hot Saucerman
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          All of which happened during the Trump administration.

          https://theintercept.com/2018/11/16/as-the-obama-doj-concluded-prosecution-of-julian-assange-for-publishing-documents-poses-grave-threats-to-press-freedom/

          Here is Glenn Greenwald discussing the Obama era DOJ and their choices on the matter, in response to the indictment you are referencing.

          Prior to that, they did not recommend charges. The original Grand Jury was set in motion in 2010.

          • Five@beehaw.orgOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You’re right, it was during the Trump administration. For some reason I thought the first indictment had been made and then sealed during Obama’s tenure. Trump’s attack was a major escalation.

            I don’t see any reference to a Grand Jury in the linked article, and I can’t find anything in Google about “assange grand jury 2010”. Are you thinking about this section?

            Justice officials said they looked hard at Assange but realized that they have what they described as a “New York Times problem.” If the Justice Department indicted Assange, it would also have to prosecute the New York Times and other news organizations and writers who published classified material, including The Washington Post and Britain’s Guardian newspaper.

            It seems to indicate that they didn’t even bother to assemble a grand jury, which is even better for Obama.

              • Five@beehaw.orgOP
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                Thanks. Yeah, I think I heard about this jury, but only that its deliberation was secret, and I never found out what was decided. When the indictment was unsealed, I assumed it was the revelation of this Jury’s decision.

                • Hot Saucerman
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  Easy to get mixed up. It has been a long and complex case!

                  Even more complex with the changing of administrations who each handled it differently.

                  • Five@beehaw.orgOP
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Do you remember when the decision of the 2011 grand jury was revealed? If they kept it secret to scare Assange, that’s still a pretty outrageous form of press intimidation.