undefined | Better HN

0 pointsboomboomsubban1y ago0 comments

The plea is linked in the article, it very clearly says it's over receiving and willfully communicating classified documents.

0 comments

alistairSH1y ago

Are we reading the same document? It clearly states Assange “knowingly and unlawfully conspired with Chelsea Manning to commit the following offenses against the United States…”

The case isn’t about Assange simply receiving classified material from Manning.

boomboomsubbanOP1y ago

>“knowingly and unlawfully conspired with Chelsea Manning to commit the following offenses against the United States…”.

Why are you quoting that part rather than any of the actual offenses? He undoubtedly conspired with Manning to receive classified documents for the purpose of publishing them, which is what the plea details.

Part (a) even says he "received or obtained" classified documents from a person knowing that they were illegally obtained. It doesn't say he helped with the illegal obtaining.

tssva1y ago

The actual offensive says he knew the documents had been and “would be” obtained illegally. The key phrase is “would be”. Once he knew documents would in the future be taken illegally and agreed to receive them and publish them it entered the realm of an illegal conspiracy to obtain classified material.

This differs from for example The Pentagon Papers where the material was delivered to reporters after already having been taken. They had no foreknowledge that they would be taken.

1 more reply

tptacek1y ago

It doesn't list any of the overt acts, because it's a plea agreement, and the defense stipulates to the conspiracy; there's nothing to prove, except that the prosecution and defense agree.

1 more reply

tptacek1y ago

The article links to the plea document.

boomboomsubbanOP1y ago

Yes, I said that.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

alistairSH1y ago

Are we reading the same document? It clearly states Assange “knowingly and unlawfully conspired with Chelsea Manning to commit the following offenses against the United States…”

The case isn’t about Assange simply receiving classified material from Manning.

boomboomsubbanOP1y ago

>“knowingly and unlawfully conspired with Chelsea Manning to commit the following offenses against the United States…”.

Part (a) even says he "received or obtained" classified documents from a person knowing that they were illegally obtained. It doesn't say he helped with the illegal obtaining.

tssva1y ago

This differs from for example The Pentagon Papers where the material was delivered to reporters after already having been taken. They had no foreknowledge that they would be taken.

1 more reply

tptacek1y ago

It doesn't list any of the overt acts, because it's a plea agreement, and the defense stipulates to the conspiracy; there's nothing to prove, except that the prosecution and defense agree.

1 more reply

tptacek1y ago

The article links to the plea document.

boomboomsubbanOP1y ago

Yes, I said that.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse