, 26 tweets, 8 min read Read on Twitter
An FBI affidavit dated December 21, 2017, in the case against WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange was unsealed. It further confirms US government has targeted Assange for his role in publishing information.

Let's go through it.
Generally, the introduction in affidavit criminalizes the use of anonymity tools by Julian Assange, a publisher. Concealing communications, masking identities, and employing encryption is seen as a way to enable the "criminal conspiracy" of journalism.
FBI special agent Megan Brown contends criminal complaint focuses on "specific illegal agreement" between Assange and Manning involving "password cracking." But focus is broader. Because affidavit criminalizes publication, particularly Afghan War Logs.
Since Manning already provided Iraq and Afghan War Logs to WikiLeaks, part of what US government seems to believe is Assange should've known Manning was leaking and rejected the leaks because Assange was not authorized to receive classified information.
FBI Special Agent Megan Brown suggested Assange and Manning collaborated on the "public release of the information." That's journalism. Sources communicate with organizations that are about to publish material they provided, and publisher may do this to maintain trust.
Clear example of how US Justice Department is criminalizing foreign journalist for not abiding by US secrecy regulations. But also goes beyond that. If Assange is criminal cause wasn't authorized to receive, so too are other US journalists receiving/publishing leaks.
In this particular section, FBI criminalizes WikiLeaks for publishing Iraq and Afghan War Logs because should've known "would cause injury to the United States." That's phrase from Espionage Act. Indeed, Assange is effectively accused of aiding and abetting espionage here.
Remarkably, in criminalizing war logs, FBI special agent Megan Brown calls attention to New York Times report titled, "Taliban Study WikiLeaks To Hunt Informants," which quotes Taliban member saying he'll punish any "U.S. spies" named in reports.
Retired Brigadier General Robert Carr, who served as chief of Information Review Task Force (IRTF) that assessed alleged damage from WikiLeaks publications, testified at Manning's court-martial. No US official ever confirmed that any person named was killed by Taliban
FBI affidavit against Assange highlights how forces that raided Osama bin Laden's compound found WikiLeaks war logs on digital media. This was used by military prosecutors to argue Manning "aided the enemy" but military judge acquitted Manning of charge.
In political case against Julian Assange, US Justice Department is recycling a part of failed case against whistleblower to criminalize a publisher.
FBI special agent Megan Brown contended Afghanistan War Logs contained "detailed reports" of IED attacks. "The enemy could use these reports to plan future IED attacks."
NY Times published several reports on IED attacks between Nov 2009 & March 2010 (time period at issue in this case). Certainly, NYT published info that could be useful to militants in developing "countermeasures." So are they vulnerable to prosecution too? google.com/search?q=site%…
Section on WikiLeaks publishing US diplomatic cable about issue in Iceland, "Icesave," contains this sentence: "WikiLeaks received and published classified documents, despite their clear markings indicating that they were classified." It criminalizes Assange for journalism.
There's allegedly person who FBI "interviewed" on June 27, 2011, who provided info proving Assange used account Manning communicated with on Jabber. Person met Julian Assange in December 2009 in Berlin, Germany.
All these two paragraphs of FBI affidavit prove is Chelsea Manning believed she was communicating with Julian Assange. This isn't necessarily evidence Manning was talking to Assange. What US Person 1 allegedly told FBI agents is more confirmation than any of this.
One part of FBI affidavit criminalizes conversation Assange had with Manning over Guantanamo detainee assessments.
At no point does Assange specifically request Manning provide Gitmo files nor does Assange state explicitly WikiLeaks would publish such documents. What he confirms to Manning is that documents are in public interest.
In timeline, Manning was already interested in Gitmo files because she passed on files related to Iraqi federal police detaining and abusing political opponents of Maliki government. Manning felt she had responsibility to blow whistle, but WikiLeaks didn't publish these files
Rather incredible that this part about allegedly complicating release of Gitmo detainees is in affidavit, given Trump administration has preserved indefinite military detention at Gitmo. Five detainees cleared for transfer remain in facility.
Materials on Iraqi federal police were never published by WikiLeaks. Yet, FBI affidavit criminalizes Assange for planning to suppress material that would've revealed Manning was the source.

Clear criminalization of journalistic discussion on protecting confidential source
FBI seems to think Assange knowing Manning was in US armed forces in Iraq matters to case for conspiracy. Is it a crime to publish anything from deployed or active duty military members?
Next, a few pages cover the "password cracking agreement." What stands out is one of Manning's responses in chat logs allegedly with Assange was blacked out. Only words redacted in unsealed FBI affidavit
Backtracking—the US Person 2 mentioned in the affidavit is Adrian Lamo, who was informant for US government. Lamo testified at Manning's trial. It's public knowledge Lamo enabled her arrest. He died in March 2018 after this affidavit was filed.
Entire section displays the contempt and indifference US Justice Department has for political asylum. FBI special agent Megan Brown says Assange "fled justice."
Here's full write-up on the FBI affidavit against WikiLeaks editor-in-chief Julian Assange, with some more context. As should be clear, this isn't merely some focused case against computer crime. Publisher is being criminalized for journalism shadowproof.com/2019/04/16/fbi…
Missing some Tweet in this thread?
You can try to force a refresh.

Like this thread? Get email updates or save it to PDF!

Subscribe to Kevin Gosztola
Profile picture

Get real-time email alerts when new unrolls are available from this author!

This content may be removed anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just three indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!