If he did what the justice department claims, I suppose he'd tell the truth here just to watch it burn, since he's made a career of publishing damning information (what journalists are supposed to do).
The US Supreme court already said it's perfectly legal for journalists to publish classified information (thanks failing new york times). Obviously obtaining classified information without a clearance IS illegal (based on the executive order creating the idea of classified information), but the supreme court conferred rights to journalists based on the first ammendment saying there may be no law restricting a free press.
The justice department is saying they have evidence that he personally directed the theft/crimes rather than an indirect solicitation of information for publication. All he has to do is show that he didn't direct the crimes. Fairly sure all correspondence is digitally signed and encrypted. If the direction to commit a crime is signed with his key, he's probably fucked.
Journalists are allowed to solicit information and allowed to publish information.
Good read - predates 2016 - 2008 to 2015 latest.
Not DNC/Clinton ( unless I missed it.).
THERE IS NO LEGAL PROTECTION FOR JOURNALISTS PROTECTING THEIR SOURCES
Grand Jury under oath
"DID SETH CONRAD RICH PROVIDE WIKILEAKS WITH STOLEN DATA"
the question must be answered truthfully.
Assange is more than likely fucked no matter what he says, what is his motivation to tell the truth? Asking seriously.
If he did what the justice department claims, I suppose he'd tell the truth here just to watch it burn, since he's made a career of publishing damning information (what journalists are supposed to do).
The US Supreme court already said it's perfectly legal for journalists to publish classified information (thanks failing new york times). Obviously obtaining classified information without a clearance IS illegal (based on the executive order creating the idea of classified information), but the supreme court conferred rights to journalists based on the first ammendment saying there may be no law restricting a free press.
The justice department is saying they have evidence that he personally directed the theft/crimes rather than an indirect solicitation of information for publication. All he has to do is show that he didn't direct the crimes. Fairly sure all correspondence is digitally signed and encrypted. If the direction to commit a crime is signed with his key, he's probably fucked.
Journalists are allowed to solicit information and allowed to publish information.
Meanwhile 0 indictments of deep state that attempted a coup.