Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

stundin.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 334 posts

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#241

Post by ozfive »

NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #13
gonehome wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that’s not illegal for somebody without a clearance. The crime he’s charged with is that he was willing to (and I think did?) assist in breaking into a computer system to get the docs. I think under the CFAA. They have communication records of this because the person he was talking to was working for the USG. Had he just been accepting docs as he was initially that would have been fine. It’s hard to know the trut…

>The crime he’s charged with is that he was willing to (and I think did?) assist in breaking into a computer system to get the docs. I think under the CFAA. They have communication records of this because the person he was talking to was working for the USG. The US government claims this, but it's not been proven. > At some point Russia was also using Wikileaks as a place to target the USG with some plausible deniabi…

>The US government claims this, but it's not been proven.

Well now with their only witness coming out and saying that he lied about the whole thing and is receiving immunity for his testimony they've got shit-all.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#242

Post by ozfive »

gonehome wrote: post #15
NaturalPhallacy wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The crime he’s charged with is that he was willing to (and I think did?) assist in breaking into a computer system to get the docs. I think under the CFAA. They have communication records of this because the person he was talking to was working for the USG. The US government claims this, but it's not been proven. > At some point Russia was also using Wikileaks as a place to target the USG with some plausible deniabi…

I think you’re overconfident in what you believe to be true based on the evidence that exists. The Russian bit can be politically inconvenient for you and yet also be true.

Reading the article it looks like the accusations have been fabricated by a pathological liar. Their star witness against JA is coming out and saying essentially he did it to run from Assange since he ripped WL off for $50k and now he's coming clean about making the whole thing up. The witness is a pedo/criminal as the witness for this whole case.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#243

Post by ozfive »

Taniwha wrote: post #222
the_optimist wrote: post #204

What an absolute joke. FBI/CIA recruits a child molester to lie about Assange. https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/09/25/siggi_the... Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?”

To be fair we don't know whether he's telling the truth now - but it certainly creatges reasonable doubt

More than reasonable doubt. The case will need to be thrown out. Between the false allegations of rape and now this their case is hanging by a thread if not dead in the water.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#244

Post by the_optimist »

the_optimist wrote: post #238
jacobolus wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Durham - now Special Counsel - still quietly looks for the truth I have no insight into the body of the post, but LOL at this conclusion. Durham has been running his “investigation” now for more than two years and has found diddly squat. The sole product of the Durham investigation is breathless “just wait for the bombshell” punditry from disingenuous right-wing extremist pundits, the same crew who are convinced Hi…

One person here strewing random, quite absurd theories about, and that's not me, nor the author of that in-depth historically factual piece. Not sure why you LOL at innocent people dying in prison, strikes me as a bit indecent.

We've reached max depth. The answer to your question is: it doesn't reflect at all on Assange, but it does shine quite a bright light directly on the FBI/CIA.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#245

Post by cachvico »

k1m wrote: post #142
breakfastduck wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I widely agree, if we're fair there's a difference between a Journalist covering leaked stuff and literally releasing the full unredacted documents to the public. Otherwise I agree. His treatment comes down to nothing other than the fact the USA govt want to make it very, very clear that they are willing to totally destroy anyone's lives who dare publish the horrific things they're doing.

> if we're fair there's a difference between a Journalist covering leaked stuff and literally releasing the full unredacted documents to the public. It was actually senior Guardian journalists who compromised the cables by publishing the password Assange had entrusted them with. That's what led to the unredacted copies being made available. Jonathan Cook has written about it here: https://www.jonathan-cook.net/blog/2…

That is an extremely enlightening link.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#246

Post by busterarm »

emmelaich wrote: post #157
DevKoala wrote: post #135

Is there any way to vote against the current way the FBI/CIA operates? They are straight up coercing witnesses with fake testimonies to get a man prison, whose only crime was sharing the truth about the shameful inner workings of our American government.

Vote for the party which is most critical on them. Currently Republicans though it used to be the Democrats. Embedding undercover agitators in radical groups goes on all the time I'm sure. It's valuable but very easily abused, too.

Why do you think the FBI embedded itself in a right-wing group and then cooked up the idea to kidnap Governor Whitmer?

You know, the FBI seems to have advanced notice and involvement with a lot of these kinds of plots...including the ones that actually go off. What is it that they're getting done with our tax money anyway?

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#247

Post by bobthepanda »

the_optimist wrote: post #204

What an absolute joke. FBI/CIA recruits a child molester to lie about Assange. https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/09/25/siggi_the... Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?”

> Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?”

There's a whole political party whose dominant position is to go "rah rah" and paint pretty much any criticism of these agencies as unpatriotic. It is still not a settled opinion in the US that waterboarding is torture.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#248

Post by the_optimist »

bobthepanda wrote: post #247
the_optimist wrote: post #204

What an absolute joke. FBI/CIA recruits a child molester to lie about Assange. https://icelandmonitor.mbl.is/news/news/2015/09/25/siggi_the... Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?”

> Who on earth isn’t asking at this point “Are we (US intel agencies) the baddies?” There's a whole political party whose dominant position is to go "rah rah" and paint pretty much any criticism of these agencies as unpatriotic. It is still not a settled opinion in the US that waterboarding is torture.

Truth and justice have no political affinity, stated nor implied.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#249

Post by barry-cotter »

DevKoala wrote: post #135

Is there any way to vote against the current way the FBI/CIA operates? They are straight up coercing witnesses with fake testimonies to get a man prison, whose only crime was sharing the truth about the shameful inner workings of our American government.

No.

Re: Key witness in Assange case admits to lies in indictment

#250

Post by ipaddr »

lugged wrote: post #212
d3ntb3ev1l wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We can’t even vote for politicians to fix potholes

This is why multi party systems work better than two party systems. You can have a party dedicated to potholes if you have enough potholes, and you can have a party dedicated to agency oversight. Both partys need to form coalitions to get any control, and need to compromise with each other or find win win situations for both parties. The two party system has similar inside groups that sort of do this but it isnt pron…

You can have multi parties with having single issue parties. Single issue parties are short sighted and can't respond to areas outside of a issue because the party isn't unified. You need some idology.
Post reply on HN