US unseals Assange affidavit, revealing probable cause for extradition & arrest for ‘conspiracy’
AENN
“I have read the Indictment against Julian Assange by the US Dept of Justice and they have no case. There is no evidence or documents or testimony that can be used against Assange other than alleged “chats” between Manning and someone “he believed” was Julian Assange on the other end of the computer. Complete legal nonsense that cannot stick, and they dare not expand the complaint for they would naturally have to indict WAPost, NYTimes and others for publishing secret material given to them”.
Scott Bennett, Author: Shell Game
US prosecutors have unsealed an affidavit against Julian Assange that outlines their case against the WikiLeaks co-founder on a single count of “conspiracy to commit computer intrusion” that may or may not have succeeded.
As FBI special agent Megan Brown admits in the affidavit, “it remains unknown whether Manning and Assange were successful in cracking the password” to the Department of Defense computer they allegedly conspired to hack, meaning the sole charge against Assange remains his alleged attempt to assist Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning in accessing the documents that were eventually leaked in 2010.
The “probable cause” for Assange’s extradition to the US is described as hundreds of messages sent between Manning and Assange on the Jabber platform. The two “conspirators” should have known that releasing the documents “would cause injury to the United States,” Brown declares, since it contained information about US allies in Afghanistan who were assisting coalition forces.
The affidavit dramatically refers to “one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States,” but fails to even ascertain whether the “illegal agreement that Assange and Manning reached” was what ultimately unleashed the trove of documents. Brown can only speculate as to how the computer was eventually breached.ALSO ON RT.COMUnsealed Assange indictment proves Chelsea Manning’s imprisonment is ‘purely punitive’ – legal team
In an effort to present the leaks in as damaging a light as possible, Brown reproduces one almost cartoonish exchange, claiming “after the release of the Afghanistan War Reports, a member of the Taliban contacted the New York Times” and stated: “We are studying the report… If they are US spies, then we will know how to punish them.” Osama bin Laden is also said to be a WikiLeaks fan, with letters found during the raid on his Abbottabad compound instructing an al-Qaeda member to “gather” the material leaked by Manning.
Having been assigned to the case in 2017 – less than a year before filing the affidavit – Brown admits her understanding of the seven-year-old “criminal conspiracy” is based on “testimony of a forensic examiner in Manning’s court martial, my conversations with FBI forensic examiners, and research on the internet.” The internet was quick to pick apart her timing – and the rest of the document.View image on Twitter
Micah Lee?@micahfleeReplying to @micahflee
The alleged crime was in 2010, but Brown wasn’t assigned to the case until 2017. I think this adds weight to the argument that Obama DOJ decided they couldn’t move forward for press freedom reasons, but Trump DOJ decided to just go for it, because screw the free press3322:40 PM – Apr 15, 2019209 people are talking about thisTwitter Ads info and privacy
Andrew Blake?@apblake · Apr 15, 2019Replying to @apblake
The US affidavit against Julian Assange was signed two days after Ecuador unsuccessfully attempted to grant him diplomatic status, per The Guardian’s reporting (left).
The affidavit in US v Julian Assange was signed the *same* day that the UK rejected Ecuador’s attempt to grant him diplomatic status, per Reuters https://www.reuters.com/article/us-ecuador-assange-exclusive/exclusive-ecuador-attempted-to-give-assange-diplomat-post-in-russia-document-idUSKCN1M12R5 … pic.twitter.com/jYuFSq6KUo711:46 AM – Apr 15, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacy
See Andrew Blake’s other Tweets
Frederik Obermaier?@f_obermaier
„Would“ … „would“… „remains unknown“ … „no other evidence“ #Assange (https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.384245/gov.uscourts.vaed.384245.2.0.pdf …)48712:49 PM – Apr 15, 2019250 people are talking about thisTwitter Ads info and privacy
Micah Lee?@micahflee · Apr 15, 2019Replying to @micahflee
Manning allegedly booted to a Linux CD on two DoD Windows computers, which apparently didn’t use disk encryption and allowed booting from CDs, to dump password hashes.
The password Assange allegedly agreed to help crack was for the FTP user, which didn’t belong to a human
Contrary to what a lot of people seem to believe, the password in question was for a local computer-only account on two Windows computers that Manning had legit access to. It wouldn’t have given her access to new databases or documents that she didn’t already have access to1092:41 PM – Apr 15, 2019Twitter Ads info and privacy58 people are talking about thisView image on Twitter
Raffi Khatchadourian?@raffiwriter
Assange affidavit speculates on motivation for hash cracking.112:41 PM – Apr 15, 2019See Raffi Khatchadourian’s other TweetsTwitter Ads info and privacyALSO ON RT.COMNo fair trial awaits Assange at US ‘Espionage Court,’ only more charges – CIA whistleblower Kiriakou
Assange was arrested by UK police last week on a bail-jumping charge after Ecuador revoked his asylum and evicted him from its London embassy, where he had lived for over seven years. He faces extradition to the US and a maximum five years in prison – assuming US authorities don’t pile on further charges once they have him in their clutches.
