SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
WikiLeaks truck on Capitol Hill. (Photo: WikiLeaks Mobile Information Collection Unit/flickr/cc)
The FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are still pursuing an "ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks," news outlets reported Thursday, citing a ruling from the U.S. district court for the District of Columbia.
In largely rejecting a Freedom of Information Act request by the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) for information about the government's surveillance of WikiLeaks supporters, U.S. District Court judge Barbara Rothstein cited (pdf) FBI and Justice Department claims that the disclosure of such information would prejudice a "multi-subject investigation" into the website that is "still active and ongoing."
Over the five years since WikiLeaks first published a massive cache of U.S. state secrets leaked by former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, there has been significant speculation regarding whether the Justice Department would prosecute the media organization or its founder, Julian Assange.
In 2012, an Australian newspaper reported that a "sealed indictment" existed in the U.S. against Assange, who is currently living in the embassy of Ecuador in London after being granted asylum there that year. In 2013, the website urged the U.S. government "to do the right thing: close the investigation and formally and unequivocally tell WikiLeaks that no charges will be brought."
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Judge Rothstein accepted 10-month-old claims by the FBI and Justice Department that disclosure of any details about the individuals who had been targeted for surveillance could "expose the scope and methods of the investigation, and tip-off subjects and other persons of investigative interest."
Observers said the decision highlights the Obama administration's ongoing hostility toward WikiLeaks specifically and whistleblowers in general.
WikiLeaks's lawyer, Michael Ratner, told the Guardian that Thursday's revelations left no doubt about the U.S. government's intentions.
"We are talking about a serious, multi-subject long-term investigation of WikiLeaks and its people," Ratner said. "This confirms in spades that the U.S. authorities are coming after WikiLeaks and want to close it down."
The Guardian further reports:
In her ruling, the judge ordered the national security division of the DoJ to redouble its search of its files for documents that might fit the freedom of information request. But she sided with the federal agencies in granting them an exemption to the rules, so that they did not have to hand over any material to Epic--on grounds that doing so might interfere with their law enforcement activities.
The FBI and criminal division argued before the court that the release of their files "would allow targets of the investigation to evade law enforcement". Rothstein agreed that "the government's declarations, especially when viewed in light of the appropriate deference to the executive on issues of national security, may satisfy this burden."
In her analysis of the court ruling, investigative journalist Marcy Wheeler concluded: "I'm left with the impression that FBI has reams of documents responsive to what EPIC was presumably interested in--how innocent people have had their privacy compromised because they support a publisher the U.S. doesn't like--but that they're using a variety of tired dodges to hide those documents."
For his part, Assange told the Guardian: "My God, I know I am an Australian, but that doesn't mean that WikiLeaks deserves a kangaroo court."
Dear Common Dreams reader, The U.S. is on a fast track to authoritarianism like nothing I've ever seen. Meanwhile, corporate news outlets are utterly capitulating to Trump, twisting their coverage to avoid drawing his ire while lining up to stuff cash in his pockets. That's why I believe that Common Dreams is doing the best and most consequential reporting that we've ever done. Our small but mighty team is a progressive reporting powerhouse, covering the news every day that the corporate media never will. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. And to ignite change for the common good. Now here's the key piece that I want all our readers to understand: None of this would be possible without your financial support. That's not just some fundraising cliche. It's the absolute and literal truth. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. Will you donate now to help power the nonprofit, independent reporting of Common Dreams? Thank you for being a vital member of our community. Together, we can keep independent journalism alive when it’s needed most. - Craig Brown, Co-founder |
The FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are still pursuing an "ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks," news outlets reported Thursday, citing a ruling from the U.S. district court for the District of Columbia.
In largely rejecting a Freedom of Information Act request by the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) for information about the government's surveillance of WikiLeaks supporters, U.S. District Court judge Barbara Rothstein cited (pdf) FBI and Justice Department claims that the disclosure of such information would prejudice a "multi-subject investigation" into the website that is "still active and ongoing."
Over the five years since WikiLeaks first published a massive cache of U.S. state secrets leaked by former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, there has been significant speculation regarding whether the Justice Department would prosecute the media organization or its founder, Julian Assange.
In 2012, an Australian newspaper reported that a "sealed indictment" existed in the U.S. against Assange, who is currently living in the embassy of Ecuador in London after being granted asylum there that year. In 2013, the website urged the U.S. government "to do the right thing: close the investigation and formally and unequivocally tell WikiLeaks that no charges will be brought."
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Judge Rothstein accepted 10-month-old claims by the FBI and Justice Department that disclosure of any details about the individuals who had been targeted for surveillance could "expose the scope and methods of the investigation, and tip-off subjects and other persons of investigative interest."
Observers said the decision highlights the Obama administration's ongoing hostility toward WikiLeaks specifically and whistleblowers in general.
WikiLeaks's lawyer, Michael Ratner, told the Guardian that Thursday's revelations left no doubt about the U.S. government's intentions.
"We are talking about a serious, multi-subject long-term investigation of WikiLeaks and its people," Ratner said. "This confirms in spades that the U.S. authorities are coming after WikiLeaks and want to close it down."
The Guardian further reports:
In her ruling, the judge ordered the national security division of the DoJ to redouble its search of its files for documents that might fit the freedom of information request. But she sided with the federal agencies in granting them an exemption to the rules, so that they did not have to hand over any material to Epic--on grounds that doing so might interfere with their law enforcement activities.
The FBI and criminal division argued before the court that the release of their files "would allow targets of the investigation to evade law enforcement". Rothstein agreed that "the government's declarations, especially when viewed in light of the appropriate deference to the executive on issues of national security, may satisfy this burden."
In her analysis of the court ruling, investigative journalist Marcy Wheeler concluded: "I'm left with the impression that FBI has reams of documents responsive to what EPIC was presumably interested in--how innocent people have had their privacy compromised because they support a publisher the U.S. doesn't like--but that they're using a variety of tired dodges to hide those documents."
For his part, Assange told the Guardian: "My God, I know I am an Australian, but that doesn't mean that WikiLeaks deserves a kangaroo court."
The FBI and the U.S. Department of Justice are still pursuing an "ongoing criminal investigation of WikiLeaks," news outlets reported Thursday, citing a ruling from the U.S. district court for the District of Columbia.
In largely rejecting a Freedom of Information Act request by the Washington, D.C.-based Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) for information about the government's surveillance of WikiLeaks supporters, U.S. District Court judge Barbara Rothstein cited (pdf) FBI and Justice Department claims that the disclosure of such information would prejudice a "multi-subject investigation" into the website that is "still active and ongoing."
Over the five years since WikiLeaks first published a massive cache of U.S. state secrets leaked by former army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, there has been significant speculation regarding whether the Justice Department would prosecute the media organization or its founder, Julian Assange.
In 2012, an Australian newspaper reported that a "sealed indictment" existed in the U.S. against Assange, who is currently living in the embassy of Ecuador in London after being granted asylum there that year. In 2013, the website urged the U.S. government "to do the right thing: close the investigation and formally and unequivocally tell WikiLeaks that no charges will be brought."
According to the Sydney Morning Herald, Judge Rothstein accepted 10-month-old claims by the FBI and Justice Department that disclosure of any details about the individuals who had been targeted for surveillance could "expose the scope and methods of the investigation, and tip-off subjects and other persons of investigative interest."
Observers said the decision highlights the Obama administration's ongoing hostility toward WikiLeaks specifically and whistleblowers in general.
WikiLeaks's lawyer, Michael Ratner, told the Guardian that Thursday's revelations left no doubt about the U.S. government's intentions.
"We are talking about a serious, multi-subject long-term investigation of WikiLeaks and its people," Ratner said. "This confirms in spades that the U.S. authorities are coming after WikiLeaks and want to close it down."
The Guardian further reports:
In her ruling, the judge ordered the national security division of the DoJ to redouble its search of its files for documents that might fit the freedom of information request. But she sided with the federal agencies in granting them an exemption to the rules, so that they did not have to hand over any material to Epic--on grounds that doing so might interfere with their law enforcement activities.
The FBI and criminal division argued before the court that the release of their files "would allow targets of the investigation to evade law enforcement". Rothstein agreed that "the government's declarations, especially when viewed in light of the appropriate deference to the executive on issues of national security, may satisfy this burden."
In her analysis of the court ruling, investigative journalist Marcy Wheeler concluded: "I'm left with the impression that FBI has reams of documents responsive to what EPIC was presumably interested in--how innocent people have had their privacy compromised because they support a publisher the U.S. doesn't like--but that they're using a variety of tired dodges to hide those documents."
For his part, Assange told the Guardian: "My God, I know I am an Australian, but that doesn't mean that WikiLeaks deserves a kangaroo court."