This House Has People In It
Are you ready to live your life live streaming on the Internet?
Too late.
Apr 15 2019
The Breakfast Club (Impossibility)
Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.
This Day in History
The Titanic sinks off the coast of Newfoundland; President Abraham Lincoln dies; Jackie Robinson becomes first African American player in Major League Baseball; US launches air raid against Libya; Cambodian Communist revolutionary Pol Pot dies; Punk rocker Joey Ramone dies at age 49.
Breakfast Tunes
Something to Think about over Coffee Prozac
We are an impossibility in an impossible universe.
Apr 14 2019
Low Political Content
Crazy
That’s why they call it acting
Isopropyl
With the Ladies
Baby, Baby, Baby, Baby
College Daze
Morning Talk
Hobby Horse
Fashion
Oh, you want news.
Apr 14 2019
House
See?
Kodachrome
Bohemian Rhapsody
Insane in the Brain
Bah, I feel I have a good mix. Most of it is as funny as it can be under the circumstances. I should be more socially active, that’s what all the websites tell me. I think it eats your soul. Not because of disagreement, it’s the demand for instant response.
I have a cell to call out, maybe get a text. My Voice Mail is full so please don’t bother and don’t pretend you’ve reached me either.
I read. I write. I’m trying to give up obsessive competitiveness. Were I still at dK I’d be duking it out with Elise to see who could finish with more comments and higher mojo (I posted over 100 per day and carried an average mojo of 5 Recs per).
I don’t miss it which is why I don’t twit.
Apr 14 2019
The Breakfast Club (Good Eats)
Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:30am (ET) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.
AP’s Today in History for April 14th
President Abraham Lincoln assassinated; Titanic strikes iceberg; First videotape demonstrated; Loretta Lynn born.
Breakfast Tune “Blue Kentucky Girl” by: Heather Berry (song of the day 20)
<>
Something to think about, Breakfast News & Blogs below
Julian Assange Arrested for Violating Bail
Ian Welsh
Update 2: So, we have a US extradition charge. This is a direct assault on the freedom of the press and those who say it isn’t are fools. The DOJ claim is that Assange didn’t just accept Manning’s documents, he encouraged Manning to go get more. Journalists do this all the time. Likewise, Assange is not American and Wikileaks is not an American institution, so the US is claiming extraordinary extradition rights.
So, it begins. The US put a ton of pressure on Ecuador to make this happen:
More: WikiLeaks says its founder Assange did not "walk out of the embassy". The Ecuadorian ambassador invited British police into the embassy and he was immediately arrested https://t.co/FWYZSDrQlE
— Jim Sciutto (@jimsciutto) April 11, 2019
In itself, this isn’t a big deal, though Ecuador’s caving is pathetic (if rather expected). The question is: What comes next? If Assange is extradited to the US, it will be a huge blow for freedom of the press. Since the Swedish sexual assault charges have been rescinded, if that doesn’t happen this all seems rather overblown.
This has nothing to do with Assange being something of a piece of work. It has to do with the fact that the information Wikileaks released with collateral murder, and even with the DNC leak, was legitimate journalistic information. The idea that journalists don’t accept info from state actors or don’t have political biases and preferences is hilariously wrong and stupid.
It’s also absurd to pretend that Assange has been treated as any other suspect. He hasn’t. His entire case has been politicized from the start, with pressure exerted that is not routine for the sort of sexual assault of which he was accused.
This is a political situation, from its start to its conclusion, whatever that might be.
Remember that Manning was just recently sent to prison on contempt charges because she refused to cooperate with a US grand jury on Wikileaks.
Assange isn’t a nice guy and that isn’t relevant to either his rights, or the bad precedent which will be set if he is prosecuted for releasing information, no matter what the source or reason.
…
These House Democrats Pledged Not to Take Corporate Cash — but They’re Using a Loophole to Do It Anyway
Lee Fang, The Intercept
Jason Crow was one of the victorious Democrats who ran in last year’s midterm election on a promise to reject campaign cash controlled by business interests. In one of his first television commercials in the campaign, Crow, now a member of Congress from Colorado, touted his pledge not “to take a dime of corporate PAC money.” Recent campaign finance filings reveal that, about two weeks after being sworn into office, Crow accepted $5,000 from the American Hospital Association PAC, which represents public and private hospital companies across the country.
The Colorado Democrat is one of several newly elected House Democrats to have run on a pledge to eschew corporate money, but have found a broad loophole to begin collecting funds from political action committees affiliated with big business.
…
The pledge loophole being exploited by these Democrats hinges on the Federal Election Commission’s designations for noncandidate-affiliated PACs. The elections regulator allows six different registrations, which include corporate, labor union, and trade association PACs. Trade associations are private groups typically formed by a collection of businesses from the same industry to advance shared interests in politics and public policy. Oil companies such as Chevron and Exxon Mobil, for instance, are represented by the American Petroleum Institute. Banks have the American Bankers Association and the Financial Services Roundtable.
Though the groups are not directly designated as corporate PACs — which are set up by for-profit companies and only take money from a particular company’s employees — they nonetheless represent infusions of corporate money into electoral politics by operating as coalitions to advance shared industry lobbying goals.
Some Democrats who pledged not to take corporate PAC money are leveraging the different FEC designations to stay true to the letter of their promises while violating their spirit.
…
- America: A Failing State
Ian Welsh
- 4 Myths About Julian Assange DEBUNKED
WashingtonsBlog
- Bernie Sanders pushes back at critics of his new wealth: ‘I didn’t know it was a crime to write a good book’
Gregory Krieg and Annie Grayer
Something to think about over coffee prozac
Dog Menu At NYC Restaurant Features $42 Steak For Your Pup
Sydney Pereira, Patch Staff
CHELSEA, NY — A restaurant in Chelsea has curated a menu for your dog, the restaurant said on Instagram.
The Wilson, located at 132 West 27th St. between Sixth and Seventh Aves., will now serve high-end doggy food for you and your pup to dine together.
The menu is “a tribute to Wilson, the bulldog, our namesake,” said the restaurant’s director of marketing in a video on Instagram.
…
Apr 14 2019
Pondering the Pundits: Sunday Preview Edition
Pondering the Pundits: Sunday Preview Edition“Pondering the Pundits” is an Open Thread. It is a selection of editorials and opinions from around the news medium and the internet blogs. The intent is to provide a forum for your reactions and opinions, not just to the opinions presented, but to what ever you find important.
On Sunday mornings we present a preview of the guests on the morning talk shows so you can choose which ones to watch or some do something more worth your time on a Sunday morning.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
The Sunday Talking Heads:
This Week with George Stephanopolis: The guests on Sunday’s “This Week” are: White House press secretary Sarah Sanders; Homeland Security Committee Chair Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-MI); and Rep. Tim Ryan (D-OH).
The roundtable guests are: ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jonathan Karl; former Gov. Chris Christie (R-NJ); Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel; Democratic Strategist Stefanie Brown James; and Republican Strategist Alice Stewart.
Face the Nation: Host Margaret Brennan’s guests are: Face the Nation will not be seen this week due to coverage of the Masters Golf Tournament.
Meet the Press with Chuck Todd: The guests on this week’s “MTP” are: White House spokesperson and liar Kellyanne Conway; and 2020 presidential candidate Gov. Jay Inslee (D-WA)
The panel guests are: David Brooks, New York Times columnist; MSNBC host Kasie Hunt; Danielle Pletka, conservative commentator and Eugene Robinson, Washington Post columnist.
State of the Union with Jake Tapper: Mr. Tapper’s guests are: Chair of the House Justice Committee Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY); Sen. Rick “Voldemort” Scott (R-FL); and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-CA)
His panel guests are: Former Tallahassee Mayor Andrew Gillum (D); conservative commentator Scott Jennings; former Obama State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki; conservative commentator Linda Chavez.
Apr 14 2019
Formula One 2019: Shanghai
I’ve been kind of light on the state of play so let’s catch up a little.
During Test Season Maranello looked unbeatable. New Aero, new engine, for the most part they were a half second a Lap faster than Mercedes who has dominated the last 5 Seasons. They were especially quick in the straights (quicker in the corners is a loser’s excuse) which led many to believe this was the year of Scuderia Marlboro.
Except not so much. Albert Park? Tight corners, Street Circuit, no surprise then that Mercedes Qualified 1st and 2nd. Maranello was split by Red Bull, Haas a surprise 6th and 7th. Finish? Bottas, Hamilton, Verstappen. LeClerc kind of backed off Vettel but was half a second faster before he did. Hamilton was, no suprize, slower off the start and that was it. Haas finished 6th and not at all.
Haas is the United States Team sponsored by Haas Motorsports who I’m given to believe participates in Flaming Chunks of Twisted Metal Bumper Cars. Couldn’t prove it by me, I don’t follow that kind of crap.
Anyway, USA! USA! and stuff like that.
In Sakhir I was a little too outraged and otherwise busy to pay much attention but it was supposed to be the day when the Scuderia would strut their stuff, except, not so much.
It didn’t start so bad, Pole and 2nd, Mercedes behind, Verstappen (who seems to have the full Red Bull effort at this point) and Haas making the 3rd Row on the Grid.
It ended up Hamilton, Bottas, LeClerc. Vettel salvaged a 5th, Verstappen kind of convincingly notched 4th. Haas performance was incredibly off (using Scuderia engines) and they could only manage 13th and a DNF. Maybe it was an Omen.
Truth told LeClerc drove away in this one and then in the last stages of the race suffered a notable power dropoff and fell from Lead to 3rd. Vettel spun out while being passed by Hamilton for 3rd. So it was LeClerc, Bottas, Hamilton for a bit then Team Orders for Bottas as LeClerc coasted home.
Bottas is a point ahead in the Driver’s Championship because he won a fastest Lap, so maybe I was wrong and it makes a difference.
In Shanghai we will Start Mercedes, Maranello, Red Bull. Everything old is new again. Mercedes was about 3 tenths faster than the Scuderia, 23 hundredths separate Bottas and Hamilton. Haas has again Qualified Top Ten, but all that really means for them is that they’ll Start the Compound they used for their fastest Lap in Q2. Compounds range from C1 (Very Hard) to C5 (Super Soft). This race will use a range from C2 Hard to C4 Soft. People seem to be planning for 2 stops and have overloaded with the C4s. Most of the first 5 Rows will be using Mediums at the lights.
So, next race.
Apr 13 2019
Black Letter Law
Steve Mnuchin is a particularly loathsome Republican whos name makes me cringe every time I see it scroll up the screen after an otherwise good movie like Wonder Woman or Lego Batman.
He really has no standing, even as Treasury Secretary, to interfere with House House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard Neal’s direct request to Charles Rettig, the IRS Commissioner, for Unidicted Co-conspirator Bottomless Pinocchio’s Tax Returns.
The Law is Black Letter, clear, explicit, and court tested. It was passed in response to the Teapot Dome Scandal and undenialbly and specifically directed at the very highest Executive Officials.
All the way up.
Mnuchin, Rettig, and Acting Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, if found in violation, are subject to up to $10,000 in fines, which will bother none of them, and also 5 years of Hard Time (Well, they probably get parked in some cushy FCC however ‘cushy’ is a relative term) which might bother them quite a lot.
We shall find out April 23rd if any of them is willing to take a bullet.
Here’s the Law That Requires Mnuchin to Turn Over Trump’s Taxes, or Lose His Office and Go to Prison
by David Cay Johnston, Daily Beast
04.11.19
Donald Trump and his top White House aide declare that the administration will not give the president’s tax returns to Congress, as required under a 1924 anti-corruption law. But both the Treasury secretary and the tax commissioner have been much more nuanced, saying that they will obey the law even as they delay actually doing so.
I know why Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Charles Rettig, the IRS commissioner, are so cautious. They don’t want to be removed from office and sent to prison for five years just for doing Trump’s bidding.
The reason will no doubt surprise those who think Trump can thumb his nose at the law governing congressional access to anyone’s tax returns, including his. It will for sure shock Trump, who claims that “the law is 100 percent on my side.”
The exact opposite is true.
Under Section 6103 of our tax code, Treasury officials “shall” turn over the tax returns “upon written request” of the chair of either congressional tax committee or the federal employee who runs Congress’s Joint Committee on Taxation. No request has ever been refused, a host of former congressional tax aides tell me.
There is, however, a law requiring every federal “employee” who touches the tax system to do their duty or be removed from office.
The crystal-clear language of this law applies to Trump, acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney, Mnuchin and Rettig, federal employees all.
The law says all of them “shall” be removed from office if they fail to comply with the request from Representative Richard Neal, the Massachusetts Democrat who chairs the House Ways and Means Committee.
There are no qualifiers in Section 6103 that shield Trump from delivering, in confidence, his tax returns to Congress. No wiggle room at all.
Another provision in our tax code, Section 7214(a), provides that “Any officer or employee of the United States acting in connection with any revenue law of the United States… who with intent to defeat the application of any provision of this title fails to perform any of the duties of his office or employment… shall be dismissed from office or discharged from employment and, upon conviction thereof, shall be fined not more than $10,000, or imprisoned not more than 5 years or both.”
All that Neal must do is make a request in writing that falls within the committee’s tax law and IRS oversight duties. Neal’s carefully articulated reasoning and requests for specific tax returns and related tax information in his April 3 letter easily meets that standard.
Congress earlier applied this law to Richard Nixon, who resigned in disgrace after a second audit of his returns showed he was a major league tax cheat. Nixon fabricated deductions worth more than $3.4 million in today’s money. Nixon got off with a pardon, while his tax lawyer went to prison.
…
Even if Mnuchin or Rettig or anyone else escaped prosecution for failing to provide the requested tax returns, removal from office under 7214(a) would damage and perhaps destroy their opportunities to cash in once they leave office.Removal from office would require disclosures to future employers and investors, limit or block service on corporate boards and require disclosures to lenders. Even someone running a privately held company, as Trump still does, would be affected by heightened disclosure requirements.
…
The good-conduct provisions of the tax law are as broad as they are severe. Significantly, it doesn’t just affect IRS auditors and collections officers. It applies to any federal employee—which means Trump as well as Mnuchin and Rettig—who “fails to perform any of the duties” they are assigned.It also applies to any federal employee “who conspires or colludes with any other person to defraud the United States; or who makes opportunity for any person to defraud” the government. This provision could hit Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff and Trump’s budget director, given his reckless statements on Fox News, which some call Trump TV.
Should congressional tax lawyers, after examining Trump’s tax returns, finds that he is a tax cheat, anyone with knowledge of the cheating would also be at risk of prosecution.
Keep in mind that Trump lost two income tax fraud civil trials over his 1984 New York state and city tax returns, as recounted in my 2016 book The Making of Donald Trump.
He is also a confessed sales tax cheat, prompting Mayor Ed Koch of New York to say that Trump should have served 15 days behind bars for his crimes.
The law covers official inaction, too. Anyone who “omits” his duty “shall” be removed and may be prosecuted as a felon.
Section 7214 covers anyone with “knowledge or information of the violation of any revenue law by any person, or of fraud committed by any person, against the United States [who] under any revenue law, fails to report, in writing, such knowledge or information to the” Treasury secretary.
The risks to his liberty and fortune help explain why Mnuchin, while not turning over tax returns by the Wednesday deadline, told Congress this week, “as I’ve said in the past when we received the request, it would be reviewed by our legal department, and it is our intent to follow the law.”
That artful language was likely written by a government lawyer to help shield Mnuchin from removal from office and prosecution, at least for now.
Mnuchin can’t stall forever. If he or Rettig tries endless inaction, forcing House Democrats to sue in federal court, the failure to act could result in the same painful results as outright refusal to comply.
Under what is known as a “delegation order,” the responsibility for giving Congress tax returns upon written request has long been the duty of the IRS commissioner.
In testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee on Tuesday, Rettig said the decision on turning over the tax returns was his. He said he is “working on” a letter about what he will do. He also noted that he reports to Mnuchin since the IRS is under the umbrella of the Treasury Department.
One big problem for Rettig and Mnuchin, and perhaps others, is the provision requiring removal from office for anyone who “conspires or colludes with any other person.”
Mnuchin has acknowledged that Treasury officials talked with White House officials. And Rettig indicated he has spoken with Mnuchin and others at Treasury.
How many others were in the loop? Maybe Congressional hearings will tell us.
Apr 13 2019
Health and Fitness News
Welcome to the Stars Hollow Gazette‘s Health and Fitness News weekly diary. It will publish on Saturday afternoon and be open for discussion about health related issues including diet, exercise, health and health care issues, as well as, tips on what you can do when there is a medical emergency. Also an opportunity to share and exchange your favorite healthy recipes.
Questions are encouraged and I will answer to the best of my ability. If I can’t, I will try to steer you in the right direction. Naturally, I cannot give individual medical advice for personal health issues. I can give you information about medical conditions and the current treatments available.
You can now find past Health and Fitness News diaries here.
Follow us on Twitter @StarsHollowGzt
Measles Outbreak
As of April 11 there are over 450 reported cases of measles in the United States that is spread out over several states. The largest outbreak is in New York City, specifically, in the Brooklyn Williamsburg area and Rockland County just north of the city, as well, a sizeable number of cases in counties in Washington state, Michigan, New Jersey, and California. There are also reports of individual cases in 14 other states. These outbreaks are linked to travelers who brought measles back from other countries such as Israel, Ukraine, and the Philippines, where large measles outbreaks are occurring. Also fueling this latest out break is the anti-vaccination movement which is based on information that is false and been discredited. The English doctor who started it has been prosecuted and lost his license to practice medicine.
Measles, which is a highly contagious viral infection, was nearly eliminated in the US after the introduction of the vaccine in 1963. In 2000, after the absence of continuous disease transmission for greater than 12 months, the CDC declared the disease eliminated in the US. It has once again been reintroduced because more parents are refusing to vaccinate their children. There are legitimate medical reasons not to vaccinate, due to severe allergies or a weakened immune system. There are about 500,000 people in the US who can’t be vaccinated. They rely on everyone else’s vaccinations to protect them, in a concept known as community (or herd) immunity. Herd immunity also keeps infants safe since they cannot be vaccinated until they are a year old.
Measles is dangerous, especially for young children and it can kill.
From 2001-2013, 28% of children younger than 5 years old who had measles had to be treated in the hospital. For some children, measles can lead to: Pneumonia.
One out of every 1,000 measles cases progresses to acute encephalitis, which often results in permanent brain damage. One or two out of every 1,000 children who become infected with measles will die from respiratory and neurological complications.
The risk of death from measles is higher for adults and infants than for children.
There is no way to predict the severity of the symptoms in an individual. It is also highly contagious:
Measles spreads through the air when an infected person coughs or sneezes. It is so contagious that if one person has it, 9 out of 10 people around him or her will also become infected if they are not protected. Your child can get measles just by being in a room where a person with measles has been, even up to two hours after that person has left. An infected person can spread measles to others even before knowing he/she has the disease—from four days before developing the measles rash through four days afterward.
It is not just children who need to be vaccinated
People in their 30s to early 60s could be at a greater risk of contracting the virus because they may have only gotten one dose of the MMR vaccine. In 1989, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention changed its recommendations by asking people to get two shots rather than just one. Those who’ve been vaccinated against measles but haven’t received the second dose may not have enough measles antibodies to protect them.
So what do you do? Simple, get vaccinated, get your children vaccinated. The best protection against measles is measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine. MMR vaccine provides long-lasting protection against all strains of measles. The measles vaccine has a small risk of minor side effects, such as fever or rash, and has no link to autism. Your child needs two doses of MMR vaccine for best protection.
Apr 13 2019
House
I have recently discovered that I’m not as World Famous (in Poland) as I’d like to be. I’m good enough and I’m smart enough and, gosh darn it, people like (yes, I did contribute to Al Franken, it was all about him, Al Franken) me.
Disconsolate I wracked my brain. My Grandfather’s Old Ram lacking in humor and whimsey? My rants, think pieces, and highlights too long; didn’t read? Not enough frenetic and oddball March Madness? Are my tunes not new or hip enough?
Then I thought, not that we need more Cowbell mind you or that I’ve ever seen it but it’s some kind of anniversary I guess. It is unavailable for embed otherwise I’d use it to intro a Blue Öyster Cult retrospective (watched them live in all sorts of dives as Soft White Underbelly) which I assure you I will inflict at some point in the future.
No, instead I thought… We need more Muppets.
Stars & Stripes FOREVER!
Jungle Boogie
Flowers On The Wall
I could do this all day, every day.
Apr 13 2019
The Breakfast Club (Evidence)
Welcome to The Breakfast Club! We’re a disorganized group of rebel lefties who hang out and chat if and when we’re not too hungover we’ve been bailed out we’re not too exhausted from last night’s (CENSORED) the caffeine kicks in. Join us every weekday morning at 9am (ET) and weekend morning at 10:00am (ET) (or whenever we get around to it) to talk about current news and our boring lives and to make fun of LaEscapee! If we are ever running late, it’s PhilJD’s fault.
This Day in History
An explosion cripples Apollo 13 on its way to the Moon; President Thomas Jefferson born; Pope John Paul II visits a synagogue; Actor Sydney Poitier achieves an Oscar milestone; Golfer Tiger Woods wins the Masters for the first time.
Breakfast Tunes
Something to Think about over Coffee Prozac
What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Apr 12 2019
The Russian Connection: Organization 1
As we all know by now, the founder of Wikileaks, Julian Assange was arrested in London on two warrants after the Ecuadoran ambassador revoked his asylum status that has lasted 7 years. He was arrested and taken to a magistrates court to face a charge of failing to surrender to the courts which he denied but was found guilty of. He was also arrested on a US extradition warrant.
At a central London police station, Assange was further arrested at the request of the US seeking his extradition over allegations he conspired with former US military analyst Chelsea Manning to download classified databases in what the US justice department called “one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States”.
The arrest provoked a fierce debate over Assange’s future and possible extradition. While the government defended the arrest over breaching bail as evidence that “no-one is above the law”, Labour and civil liberties groups condemned the US extradition request.
Assange’s lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, told the BBC’s Newsnight programme her client’s arrest set a “dangerous precedent” that should concern free speech advocates. [..]
Jeremy Corbyn tweeted “the extradition of Julian Assange to the US for exposing evidence of atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan should be opposed by the British government.”
Freedom of speech advocates including US whistleblower Edward Snowden said that an extradition over the leaks constituted a risk to press freedom. Meanwhile, as others argued that the US charges should be considered separately to the Swedish allegations, prosecutors in Stockholm said that his arrest was “news to us”.
Assange originally sought asylum in the embassy after an arrest warrant was issued in August 2010 for two separate sexual assault allegations in Sweden.
Police questioned him in Stockholm, where he denied the allegations.
After returning to the UK, he feared that if he were extradited to Sweden he might be extradited on to the US, where he believed he could face charges over WikiLeaks’ publication of the secret US government files.
n December 2010 he appeared at an extradition hearing in the UK, where he was granted bail. Following a legal battle, the courts ruled Assange should be extradited to Sweden. The WikiLeaks founder entered the Ecuadorian embassy in August 2012. He was granted political asylum and remained there until his arrest.
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow reports on the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and looks back at the relationship between WikiLeaks and the 2016 Trump campaign, which is not part of the charges Assange is facing
Back in November, I laid out four possible theories of prosecution for Assange (I’ve since came to realize we may see more theories, but these are a good rubric for now) as a way to understand how dangerous such an indictment might be for journalism.
- Receiving and publishing stolen information is illegal
- Conspiring to release stolen information for maximal damage is illegal
- Soliciting the theft of protected information is illegal
- Using stolen weapons to extort the US government is illegal
In my opinion, this indictment, as written, is closest to the third theory, which I described this way.
Then there’s the scenario that Emma Best just hit on yesterday: that DOJ would prosecute Assange for soliciting hacks of specific targets. Best points to Assange’s close coordination with hackers going back to at least 2011 (ironically, but in a legally meaningless way, with FBI’s mole Sabu).
This is, in my opinion, a possible way DOJ would charge Assange that would be very dangerous.
At its core, Assange is accused of entering into a password cracking conspiracy with Chelsea Manning on March 8, 2010 to be able to access more files on SIPRNet using someone else’s username and password.
On or about March 8, 2010, Assange agreed to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on United States Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network, a United States government network used for classified documents and communications, as designated according to Executive Order No. 13526 or its predecessor orders.
[snip]
The portion of the password Manning gave to Assange to crack was stored as a “hash value” in a computer file that was accessible only by users with administrative-level privileges. Manning did not have administrative-level privileges, and used special software, namely a Linux operating system, to access the computer file and obtain the portion of the password provided to Assange.
Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log onto the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to identify Manning as the source of disclosures of classified information.
Now, I say this is a dangerous indictment for the reasons I laid out in my earlier post.
Assange has not waived expedition and as Marcy’s partner bmaz say, he’d be nuts to do so. It is expected that the US Department of Justice will add to the the single charge that is in their warrant. That must be done before any extradition takes place. Bmaz explains in depth what Rachel Maddow and chuck Rosenberg discussed.
First off, here is the EDVA indictment that was unsealed this morning. As you can see, it is for a single count of computer hacking conspiracy. I think most people expected all kinds of different counts, up to and including espionage crimes. Those were not included, nor were the issues from the Vault 7 case, that easily could have been indicted on outside of any real First Amendment issues.
So, while the indictment could have encompassed far many more charges and issues, it does not and is just this one count.
Why is that important?
Because legal commentators like Jeff Toobin on CNN are having a field day noting that there may be more charges forthcoming. And Shimon Prokupecz of CNN reports DOJ is indeed going to seek “additional charges” against Assange. And why is that important? Because of the Rule of Specialty.
I noted this from almost the first second on Twitter, but few other than Ken White (aka Popehat) seem to have caught on to how this doctrine will come into play in the case of Assange. It is a real issue, though we do not know how it will play out at this early stage of the extradition process.
The Doctrine of Specialty is a principle of International law that is included in most extradition treaties, whereby a person who is extradited to a country to stand trial for certain criminal offenses may be tried only for those offenses and not for any other pre-extradition offenses. Long ago and far away I argued this successfully, but that was in relation to the treaty between the US and Mexico. The Assange case obviously involves a different treaty, the US/UK Extradition treaty of 2003.
So, what does the United States of America and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Treaty of 2003 provide? Well, that is contained in Article 18, which reads as follows:
Rule of Specialty
1. A person extradited under this Treaty may not be detained, tried, or punished in the Requesting State except for:
(a) any offense for which extradition was granted, or a differently denominated offense based on the same facts as the offense on which extradition was granted, provided such offense is extraditable, or is a lesser included offense;(b) any offense committed after the extradition of the person; or
(c) any offense for which the executive authority of the Requested State waives the rule of specialty and thereby consents to the person’s detention, trial, or punishment. For the purpose ofthis subparagraph:
(i) the executive authority of the Requested State may require the submission of the documentation called for in Article 8; and
(ii) the person extradited may be detained by the Requesting State for 90 days, or for such longer period of time as the Requested State may authorize, while the request for consent is being processed.
2. A person extradited under this Treaty may not be the subject of onward extradition or surrender for any offense committed prior to extradition to the Requesting State unless the Requested State consents.
3. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this Article shall not prevent the detention, trial, or punishment of an extradited person, or the extradition of the person to a third State, if the person:
(a) leaves the territory ofthe Requesting State after extradition and voluntarily returns to it; or
(b) does not leave the territory ofthe Requesting State within 20 days of the day on which that person is free to leave.
4. I f the person sought waives extradition pursuant to Article 17, the specialty provisions in this Article shall not apply.
It is early, but Assange has specifically NOT waived extradition, and I do not expect that will change. In fact, he would be nuts to waive it. But look out for the US requesting the UK to waive the issue pursuant to Article 18(1)(c). I have no idea how the UK would treat such a request (nor whether it may have already been made). But give the UK credit, they take extradition conditions seriously and will not extradite where the death penalty is in play. [..]Now, frankly, I think the US, through the DOJ, would have no problem whatsoever stipulating that the death penalty is off the table for Assange. It is almost a given.
The real question is what becomes of the Assange case in light of the Rule of Specialty. Suppose any superseding indictment does not go into charges outside of the “computer offenses” specified in the current indictment, but seeks to add additional computer offenses in an attempt to increase the sentencing range? Does that violate the spirit of the Rule of Specialty?
There is a lot we simply do not know yet. But this doctrine, and how the US proceeds in light of it, needs to be watched closely as the Assange extradition matter proceeds, both in the UK, and once he is remanded to US custody.
The other question that has been raised was the hacking of the DNC e-mails and Assange’s connection to the Russian interference with the 20106 election, as well as, his association with Trump’s associates.
As Rachel says, watch this space.