NBC: U.S. can't link accused Army private to Assange Military also denies allegations that Bradley M

[nadinbrzezinski]

Source: MSNBC News

U.S. military officials tell NBC News that investigators have been unable to make any direct connection between a jailed army private suspected with leaking secret documents and Julian Assange, founder of the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks.

The officials say that while investigators have determined that Manning had allegedly unlawfully downloaded tens of thousands of documents onto his own computer and passed them to an unauthorized person, there is apparently no evidence he passed the files directly to Assange, or had any direct contact with the controversial
U.S. military officials tell NBC News that investigators have been unable to make any direct connection between a jailed army private suspected with leaking secret documents and Julian Assange, founder of the whistleblowing website WikiLeaks.

Assange, an Australian national, is under house arrest at a British mansion near London, facing a Swedish warrant seeking his extradition for questioning on charges of rape. Assange has denied the allegations.

WikiLeaks' release of secret diplomatic cables last year caused a diplomatic stir and laid bear some of the most sensitive U.S. dealings with governments around the world. It also prompted an American effort to stifle WikiLeaks by pressuring financial institutions to cut off the flow of money to the organization.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41241414/ns/us_news-wikileaks_in_security/?ocid=twitter

---

now this is not good if you are tying to make a case against Assange... and this is GOOD.

[pnwmom]

1. I don't think they could have ever had made a case for treason

against a non-citizen. But with Manning, it doesn't matter which unauthorized person he leaked to. If he did it, he's screwed.

[Hissyspit]

2. Too bad P*****n is no longer here to try to defend his insistence that it was

just a matter of time before Manning was connected to Assange.

[Alexander]

3. I'm glad that he's not here any more. I wonder what got him the pizza.

He was always showing up on these threads, practically getting off on the idea that Assange might be tried for treason in his mind.

[Hissyspit]

4. I have no idea what happened.

[Bragi]

32. I remember that

By the time I started commenting on these threads, he/she had already charged, tried, convicted and sentenced Assange and Manning. The legal system just had to do a bit of tidying up.

[kas125]

9. He's not here anymore? All I can say about that is

it's about darned time!

[Hardrada]

46. That poster was a consistent militarist and I won't miss him.

[ronnie624]

13. You can bet he's watching this thread.

He'll be back as 'zemuron' or something. I don't think he can just walk away from DU. His writing 'style' should make him easy to spot.

[Ellipsis]

19. Didn't know... but shouda guessed.

...not bein' "hatey". :Snort:







.

[Ignis]

31. +1

[JDPriestly]

8. Under what law? I don't remember the exact wording of the Espionage

Act, but I think that requires proof of some kind of transfer. What law are you thinking of? I have no insider scoop, but I seriously doubt that Assange really knows from whom he received the documents. His expertise was (according to the Dutch film posted here the other day) encryption and computer security. At least that is how I understand it. The Wikileaks folks say that they had a system that protected the information about their contributors maybe even from them. Am I wrong about this? Did you watch that video? It discussed Assange's connection to Iceland and the publication of the bank records that revealed the incredible fraud in that country's banking sector. If you watched it, I'd like to see what you have to say about it, what you think of it. I was quite amazed by the part I saw (which was most of that video).

[pnwmom]

11. Are you talking to me? I was saying I did NOT think Assange

could be tried for treason since he's not a citizen.

[JDPriestly]

12. Sorry, pnwmom, I misunderstood your post.

[rhett o rick]

21. It appears he is screwed whether he did it or not. He is currently being punished pre-trial. nm

[No Elephants]

48. Worse. He has been and is being punished and may never be tried.

His alleged crime against the U.S. is publishing material he knew was seret AND obtained illegally.

So far, we (posters)have no evidence of either of those things, yet the U.S. has prevailed on money handlers to cut off his funding and has also prevailed on others to prosecute him for (allegedly) having had the bad luck to have a condom break.

He may never be tried for what the U.S. has been punishing him for, yet we've all but put his business under and we've gotten him hounded as a "rapist," which is how many lousy media members describe it.

God, I miss Due Process!

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

5. This narrative seems ridiculous to me

One of my friends is a career naval officer and he frequently has his own work classified above his security clearance - he literally has documents he created returned to him with the black marker treatment. And this teenager walked off with the motherload?

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. the computer system that he used

is the low level classification, for starters... just from readying a few of them... and a few of them also fall in the category of... MY FUCKING LORD this IS classified? Really?

But this alternate network was supposed to give access to all... wonder why a private in Baghdad needed access to material from mexico and the war on drugs is kind of WTF moment.

But it is also a direct result of removing all the stovepipes that all the intel agencies built, in the theory that dot connecting would happen.

Oh and it goes without saying... security? what security?

[Downwinder]

7. Conspiracy theorists!

[kas125]

10. It took them all these months to figure out what anyone who

can read learns in seconds if they read about Wikileaks - it's set up to receive information from whistle blowers anonymously. That's the entire purpose of their website, for crying out loud!

[leveymg]

14. DOJ was trying to make some sort of conspiracy charge outside the Espionage Act against Assange

Looks like that case has fallen apart. They never had a case under existing law - next, we'll see an effort to impose an Official Secrets Act on America.

And, I bet it passes both houses of Congress and Obama signs it.

[Ellipsis]

15. US can’t link Julian Assange to Bradley Manning: report

Source: Raw story/ nbc

One avenue by which the United States could press charges against Julian Assange appeared to have closed Monday, with US military officials' admission that they can't find a link between the WikiLeaks founder and PFC Bradley Manning, the alleged source of WikiLeaks' State Department cables.

News reports late last year indicated that the US was trying to build a criminal conspiracy case against Assange through evidence that he aided Manning when the Army private allegedly copied more than a quarter million classified State Department cables onto CD and walked away with them.

But according to military officials who spoke to NBC News, the US has failed to find evidence proving that link:

" The officials say that while investigators have determined that Manning had allegedly unlawfully downloaded tens of thousands of documents onto his own computer and passed them to an unauthorized person, there is apparently no evidence he passed the files directly to Assange, or had any direct contact with the controversial WikiLeaks figure."

The news appears to jibe with what Assange himself has said. In an interview with ABC News, Assange said he had "never heard of the name Bradley Manning before it was published in the press."

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/01/us-cant-link-assange-manning/

---

And so it goes...

[xchrom]

16. recommend

[Ellipsis]

17. This is disturbing.

They did, however, note that the brig commander "did not have the authority" to place Manning on "suicide watch" last week.

[KansDem]

18. Of course not...he would be on trial by now and not in some dingy dungeon

Makes one wonder if Manning is being used as a "symbol" to other would-be whistle blowers...

[rhett o rick]

20. They are waiting for a confession from Manning. nm

[Still a Democrat]

22. WikiLeaks: US military cannot find evidence linking Julian Assange to Bradley Manning

Source: The Telegraph

Investigators involved in the inquiry into how WikiLeaks received tens of thousands of classified documents have been unable to link Pte Bradley Manning, the prime suspect to Julian Assange, the WikiLeaks founder.

Although the investigators have confirmed Pte Manning, 23, had unlawfully downloaded documents and passed them to an unauthorised person, they admitted they lack evidence connecting him to Mr Assange, according to NBC News.

The release by WikiLeaks of secret diplomatic cables last year caused a diplomatic furore and revealed some of the most sensitive American dealings with foreign governments.

Mr Assange, an Australian, is in London fighting extradition to Sweden for questioning in a sexual misconduct investigation. He has denied the allegations.

...

Read more: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/wikileaks/8282223/WikiLeaks-US-military-cannot-find-evidence-linking-Julian-Assange-to-Bradley-Manning.html

[ThomCat]

23. They will either pretend it isn't necessary or fake something.

We have already seen through the tribunals that when they feel they must get a conviction they will stop at nothing to get a conviction.

[gateley]

24. Well I tried, but my rec went nowhere. :( I think this is great news! nt

[Still a Democrat]

25. There was a dupe that was zapped

You might try again.

[gateley]

26. Nope, still says 0 and that my vote was +1 - so can't try again. Just people who

disagree with us, apparently. :7

[xchrom]

27. News that makes me smile. Nt

[Bragi]

28. The DU anti-transparency crowd needs an emergency meeting /nt

[kgnu_fan]

29. .

:)

[Roy Rolling]

30. They can't find a link

because they haven't started the waterboarding.....yet. :sarcasm:

[intaglio]

33. I do wish big media would stop refering to the charge as "Rape"

The nearest short translation you can get is "Unlawful sexual intercourse."

Assange had sexual relations with both women and he admits this, as do both women. Both women blogged rather happily about it. One claims that the condom Assange was using split and after Assange refused to take an HIV test went to the police in Stockholm to find out if if he could be forced to take such a test. In theory, it was only then that the women found out about each other and brought the case to the attention of a Swedish Prosecutor.

One Prosecutor wanted Assange charged and informed the media of such. After an outcry another Prosecutor looked at the case and withdrew the charges. Then suddenly, and for no reason I can see the 1st Prosecutor was reinstated. The charges were re-issued and a European Arrest Warrant sought.

European Arrest Warrants are a device where countries in the European Union can ask another sovereign nation in Europe to deliver an accused for trial if they have committed an offense in the issuing country - even if there is no charge in the second country that matches charges being invoked by the first. It assumes the fairness of the trial system in modern Europe and only applies to members of the EU.

It seems like a good idea, especially as the EU is moving toward a Confederate or Federal system. But the devil lies in the detail.

Firstly, it assumes that signatories to the treaty will always have "fair trial" systems. Example, Turkey wants into the EU but the Turkish courts are not models of fairness and probity within European terms of reference and the Turkish government would not take kindly to it's courts being over-ruled by the EU.

Secondly, Britain and Ireland (and the USA) function under laws based on the English Common Law. This is the adversarial trial with a jury. Most of Europe, Sweden included (and Louisiana, I was surprised to find) have laws derived from the Code Napoleon in turn based on the Justinian "Corpus Juris Civilis". Under this system the law is not allowed to be insufficient in granting justice. That is if the law does not seem to cover an offense, creating injustice the "victim", then it can be tried under a law that does not specifically cover the offense. This is what seems to have happened in the Assange case. In addition countries operating under the Code Napoleon use an Inquisitorial system rather than an Adversarial one. Adversarial systems pit prosecution against defense with the court supposedly acting as an impartial referee. Inquisitorial systems are actively involved in the discovery of fact; for example the great fictional detective Maigret, although a member of the Surete, investigated for, and under the direction of, an examining magestrate.

Thirdly, and probably most importantly, is extradition law. If the US wanted to extradite Mr Assange then they would have to go through the British Courts. They would have to reveal evidence and how they got it because evidence obtained illegally under British law cannot be used in a British court. This is not something the US government would want. Under the Napoleonic style and depending upon the extradition treaty with the US an Examining Magistrate would just have to find that Mr Assange had a case to answer in the USA.

[elias49]

34. But the US doesn't seek Assange on sex charges -

So, despite your helpful explanation of some of the legal issues involved here, it spins off point a bit I think.

[On the Road]

35. Thank You for That Explanation

Most of Europe, Sweden included (and Louisiana, I was surprised to find) have laws derived from the Code Napoleon in turn based on the Justinian "Corpus Juris Civilis". Under this system the law is not allowed to be insufficient in granting justice. That is if the law does not seem to cover an offense, creating injustice the "victim", then it can be tried under a law that does not specifically cover the offense. This is what seems to have happened in the Assange case.

That is fascinating. Do you know whether and how the background in the Napoleonic Code has made Lousiana legal history different from other states, or cases where a case might have been handled differently in La?

[Iggo]

44. Thanks for the info.

[Swagman]

36. WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange slipping out of reach of US grip

Source: news.com.au

WIKILEAKS founder Julian Assange has slipped from the reach of US investigators, according to an American news report.

Authorities had been unable to link the WikiLeaks founder to Bradley Manning, the army private jailed for passing confidential information to the whistleblowing website, NBC News said yesterday.

The network's chief Pentagon correspondent Jim Miklaszewski said sources inside the US military claimed they were struggling to find any evidence to prove Mr Assange and Pte Manning communicated with each other.

"The officials say that while investigators have determined that Manning had allegedly unlawfully downloaded tens of thousands of documents on to his own computer and passed them to an unauthorised person, there is apparently no evidence he passed the files directly to Assange, or had any direct contact with the WikiLeaks figure," Mr Miklaszewski said.

If the reports are true, authorities will be powerless to extradite Mr Assange to the US to face criminal charges relating to his website's leaking of classified documents.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/features/wikileaks/wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-slipping-out-of-reach-of-us-grip/story-fn79cf6x-1225995128966

---

time to stop torturing Bradley Manning.

[xchrom]

37. news that makes me smile. nt

[FreakinDJ]

39. exactly

[Myrina]

38. duplicate

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4708985&mesg_id=4708985

[defendandprotect]

40. We need more WikiLeaks and more Assange's -- good news!!

but I doubt that will stop the US from attacking him and trying to imprison him --

or torturing Manning to "confess" to something implicating others!

[no limit]

41. So even after torturing Manning they couldn't get him to lie.

[Lint Head]

42. So when will the President get the authority to shut down

the Internet at his whim? Never I hope.

[Iggo]

43. I fear the answer is 'Eventually'.

Because it's inevitable.

[No Elephants]

49. My guess? Whenever the President wants to amend the Patriot Act to get that authority.

Will that amendment be Constitutional?

Maybe not, but both Dems and Pubs voted for provisions of the Patriot Act that even a Rethug SCOTUS later declared un-Constitutional. And America's Dems and Pubs voted many of them back in.

[joshcryer]

45. Didn't expect that they would be able to. Assange may be a creep, but he's not momumentally stupid.

[sarcasmo]

47. Kick.