Suddenly, Obama administration looking into criminal charges for Wikileaks

posted at 9:30 am on November 30, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and his crew have spent the past few months releasing classified material purloined from the American government.  After the latest round of leaks began this weekend, the Obama administration suddenly discovered that there may be laws against that.  The White House has engaged in a media blitz to assure Americans that they are right on top of those alleged crimes:

Federal authorities are investigating whether WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange violated criminal laws in the group’s release of government documents, including possible charges under the Espionage Act, sources familiar with the inquiry said Monday.

Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. said the Justice Department and Pentagon are conducting “an active, ongoing criminal investigation.” Others familiar with the probe said the FBI is examining everyone who came into possession of the documents, including those who gave the materials to WikiLeaks and also the organization itself. No charges are imminent, the sources said, and it is unclear whether any will be brought.

Former prosecutors cautioned that prosecutions involving leaked classified information are difficult because the Espionage Act is a 1917 statute that preceded Supreme Court cases that expanded First Amendment protections. The government also would have to persuade another country to turn over Assange, who is outside the United States.

But the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the inquiry is rapidly unfolding, said charges could be filed under the act. The U.S. attorney’s office in Alexandria – which in 2005 brought Espionage Act charges, now dropped, against two former pro-Israel lobbyists – is involved in the effort, the sources said.

Why is this round of leaks any different than previous leaks about the military?  It seems that the release of the diplomatic cables, unlike the earlier releases which identified hundreds of informants in Afghanistan and exposed them to mortal danger, embarrasses Obama administration officials.  Apparently it’s fine to blow military operations and the cover of those in a war zone who help the US, but when you make Hillary Clinton blush, well, look out.

Can the DoJ get an indictment?  The axiom holds that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich, but convictions are another matter.  In this case, though, the indictment seems pretty straightforward.  At least some of the material released by Wikileaks is covered by laws protecting classified information, and those laws have been upheld in the past against First Amendment challenges.  On the other hand, Assange may have a defense against selective prosecution, since the US government never prosecuted newspapers and reporters in the US that published national-security secrets, most notably the New York Times and the Washington Post.  In those cases, though, the papers didn’t publish the documents verbatim and kept the details — especially on personnel — out of print.

At least an indictment would start the ball rolling on arresting or capturing Assange and his Wikileaks team to stop any further damage to American security.  Waiting until this moment to start pursuing an indictment is a demonstration of impotence and incompetency.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Do we have an extradition treaty with Ecuador? It has already said it will take Assange.

If the Aussies take Assange’s passport, it could be interesting, although they would need some legal basis to revoke a native-born citizen’s passport.

Wethal on November 30, 2010 at 9:34 AM

Like Sarah said, why not during the last two dumps?

OmahaConservative on November 30, 2010 at 9:34 AM

They found out Assange’s calorie count was too high and sprung into action.

JammieWearingFool on November 30, 2010 at 9:35 AM

How come it took the WH and Holder over 24 hours AFTER THE FACT before they finally decided to get off their collective butts and actually start doing something about this Wikileaks garbage?!!!!

pilamaye on November 30, 2010 at 9:36 AM

None dare call him racist.

White dilettante exposes people of color to death, real torture, and genocide for the sake of his egom because he is superior to them.

Que Bono?

Wander on November 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM

looking into

For a leftist, that’s all that’s required. Just look into it. Don’t do anything, don’t conclude anything, just appoint a panel of experts to study the problem, and the problem is solved because it’s been studied.

In really serious problems, one needs to ‘raise awareness’ through meetings and street protests. Too many people are ‘unaware’ of the serious problems that need to be ‘looked into’.

So ‘somebody’ (else) should raise awareness, look into the serious problems so we can all continue to be well taken care of by our benevolent leaders.

Skandia Recluse on November 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM

Meanwhile…..back at the DOJ Ranch…Eric Holder is
saddling up…………..
============================
Department of Justice

Office of Public Affairs

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Monday, November 29, 2010

Federal Courts Order Seizure of 82 Website Domains Involved in Selling Counterfeit Goods as Part of DOJ and ICE Cyber Monday Crackdown

WASHINGTON – Seizure orders have been executed against 82 domain names of commercial websites engaged in the illegal sale and distribution of counterfeit goods and copyrighted works as part of Operation In Our Sites v. 2.0, Attorney General Eric Holder and Director John Morton of the Department of Homeland Security’s Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) announced today.

http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2010/November/10-ag-1355.html

canopfor on November 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM

Look at the front page of Drudge; Hillary used secret services to spy on and dig up dirt on political opponents… Same as what took place during the Clinton years in the WH; using the IRS, CIA, and FBI for all of the wrong reasons is what these people do.

These Liberals are pure scum.

Keemo on November 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM

It seems that the release of the diplomatic cables, unlike the earlier releases which identified hundreds of informants in Afghanistan and exposed them to mortal danger, embarrasses Obama administration officials.

Bingo.

Panic button, meet finger.

petefrt on November 30, 2010 at 9:37 AM

Why is this round of leaks any different than previous leaks about the military? It seems that the release of the diplomatic cables…embarrasses Obama administration officials.

That figures.

JetBoy on November 30, 2010 at 9:38 AM

KT McFarland is calling for 0bama to shut down wikileaks today. She made some very good points.

OmahaConservative on November 30, 2010 at 9:39 AM

Will WikiLeaks bring down the Øbama administration?

Never let a crisis go to waste. Will 0-bots use the WikiLeaks crisis to grab power over media, the internet?

petefrt on November 30, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Can Wikileaks Be Designated an FTO? No, But What About IEEPA?
Monday, November 29, 2010

Representative Peter King has urged the State Department to consider designating Wikileaks a “foreign terrorist organization,” which among other things would implicate 18 USC 2339B (the 1996 material support statute, criminalizing the provision of any form of support or resources to designated FTOs). According to one report, King said:

“By doing that we will be able to seize their funds and go after anyone who provides them with any help or contributions or assistance whatsoever,”…

I think it highly unlikely that the case could be made for designating Wikileaks an FTO, as the applicable statute ultimately does require a nexus with terrorism which so far as I know is entirely absent here. But that does not mean that the goal of subjecting Wikileaks to asset seizure and, well, an embargo of sorts, is out of reach. It’s just that the path lies with the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), rather than the FTO framework; Representative King needs to contact Treasury, not State.

http://www.lawfareblog.com/

canopfor on November 30, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Reactive, not proactive.

Good Lt on November 30, 2010 at 9:41 AM

When the crap splashes in your face, then you get going. And the crap is now flying in all directions.

tarpon on November 30, 2010 at 9:42 AM

King Abdullah — who repeatedly exhorted the US to “cut the head off the snake” by launching military strikes to destroy Iran’s nuclear program, according to leaked diplomatic cables — has forced other patients out by block-booking the hospital’s top treatment and recovery rooms.

Read more: http://www.nypost.com/p/pagesix/saudi_king_takes_york_the_entire_EypM45miPSYGs0Hd90LfVO#ixzz16mETA6A0

OmahaConservative on November 30, 2010 at 9:43 AM

Why is it that I get molested for trying to get on an airplane, but apparently people with access to computers with this much critical classified information can walk in and out with writable CD’s and thumb drives undetected?

Oh, that’s right, this is our Federal Government. :o/

cntrlfrk on November 30, 2010 at 9:43 AM

Waiting until this moment to start pursuing an indictment is a demonstration of impotence and incompetency.

Hate to disagree, but more likely it’s a demonstration of Obama’s and Holder’s desire to cause as much damage as possible to our national security interests. ✪

TXUS on November 30, 2010 at 9:44 AM

But the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity

I love that.

greggriffith on November 30, 2010 at 9:45 AM

Closing the barn door after the cow left three weeks ago sounds like one of the best ideas this administration has had in quite awhile.

And I say that with no sarcasm intended whatsoever.

NoDonkey on November 30, 2010 at 9:45 AM

So technically in the Liberal mind-set,AssLeaky is a
“Activist”,and Obama is a Social Justice “Activist”!

Seems to me,AssLeaky was helping Hopey destroy America’s
Wars by Intel Release type proxy,and yet,his Administra
tion staff were aware of the leaks,and yet no one lifted
a finger!!

canopfor on November 30, 2010 at 9:46 AM

Never let a crisis go to waste. Will 0-bots use the WikiLeaks crisis to grab power over media, the internet?

petefrt on November 30, 2010 at 9:40 AM

Of course his plan to sensor the internet will only include finding out what web sites I surf so he can punish men when I go to the wrong ones. Soon we’ll have to have home searches, background checks and mental heath evaluations from the federal government in order to get internet access.

Tommy_G on November 30, 2010 at 9:47 AM

Apparently, they (Obama and Holder) needed Hillary damaged “just enough” before attempting to shut down Wikileaks…

How comforting is it that Obama is “not pleased” with Wikileaks. An empty, “Don’t make me stop this car” response. Funny, the harshest words that have come out of this president have been aimed at Republicans.

Get out there and punish your enemies.

But, even in that, he was asking for others to do the dirty work for him.

Fallon on November 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM

The Wikileaks release raises serious questions regarding secret information and national sovereignty. If we have information and presume some ownership and domain over it, then we responsibly put up borders, create laws, and safeguards around that information because the release of that information could be damaging to the instruments of our national power—military, diplomatic and economic. This is apparently true as today we find our diplomatic efforts that have been carefully built over decades in clear disarray.

If information is sovereign and the United States claims ownership and access rights to it then what else does the United States claim ownership over and how is that ownership and access sustained? Are our borders a barrier to our national sovereignty? Does the unauthorized access to our national border threaten our national sovereignty in the same way that the unauthorized access of secret diplomatic information does? How does the current administration value our sovereignty over our secret information and our borders? There are certainly “open borders” people in the administration, are there also “open information” people as well? If our national borders are not deemed a barrier to access the United States by some in Congress and the Obama administration then why should we think that they would be any more disappointed by the unlawful access of our sovereign diplomatic information by illegal immigrants file accessers?

Ed is right. This “disappointment” is a little late by the administration. The entire concept of US national sovereignty over borders, secret information, economic stability, personal rights, property and the US Constitution is not valued by this administration.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM

Hate to disagree, but more likely it’s a demonstration of Obama’s and Holder’s desire to cause as much damage as possible to our national security interests. ✪

TXUS on November 30, 2010 at 9:44 AM

TXUS:I’m in your camp,I’m beginning to believe that theory!

canopfor on November 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM

Meanwhile there are two black panther thugs walking around free.

Assange should tell PBHO that his father was black, instant pardon.

Bishop on November 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM

The leaker was a little sissy in the military protected by DADT. Can’t prosecute a gay for a little rebellion. It ain’t his fault he is tormented by breeders.

seven on November 30, 2010 at 9:49 AM

Offer the names of those helping us go after terrorists and the Administration yawns.

Embarrass the diplomats who have shown to be more than amateurish and incompetent and the Administration finally finds out there might be a National Security problem.

We should have gone after CNN and NYT when they were putting video up of our soldiers getting killed in Iraq without any passing of the material through DoD like the Geneva Conventions require for active combat zones. Plus the outing of CIA operations for secure transport of personnel far beyond HVTs… that was under Bush’s term. And many of the diplomatic problems were around then, too.

The Left pooh-poohed the releases under Bush, which were also critical to National Defense and showed no respect for fallen US soldiers and their families. Now diplomats are shown to be incompetent and incapable… so what? What about the families of the slain by terrorists and insurgents in a war zone? What about compromising the security of our National Security personnel during a war? What about those who helped us being outed so that al Qaeda and other sorts can find them and their families to kill them?

When the Left decides to treat these former incidents to be as important as the diplomatic releases, with many leaks originating inside the US Government, particularly for CIA ops, then I will give some credence to their outrage over this.

I am horrified by ALL OF IT without exception. I do not place ideology or party above my Nation and the security of my fellow citizens… and call false security given by the TSA and other outfits for what it is: ineffectual and incompetent, while being authoritarian. False security is worse than no security as it leaves you unprepared for when it fails.

Those who stand up to defend us and help defend us get short shrift from the Left. If you stand up against one case, on principle, stand up for them all. For that is real security, going after those who seek to bring us all down and force us to their way of life when they don’t just want to kill us.

Perhaps it is time to put State under DoD so that every diplomat is a soldier, and every soldier a diplomat. Washington had that straight, and it might be the only way to get some continuity to how we treat our soldiers when facing the enemy as opposed to our diplomats dodging demarches from their desks.

ajacksonian on November 30, 2010 at 9:50 AM

Woo hoo! Into the back hole of the Holder Justice Department where the only things that escapes are announcements that they’re going to make a decision soon.

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 9:50 AM

Barry is just keeping up appearances, nothing more. Wikileaks is useful to Barry as it may provide cover and an excuse for another takeover.

anXdem on November 30, 2010 at 9:51 AM

Bwahahahahahahaha ….

— KSM, upon hearing of the announcement.

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 9:53 AM

I would guess that while Hillary was joking about the leaks during her press statement on Monday, if there’s a phone in the White House with a direct link five blocks to the State Department, it probably melted from what the missus was telling some poor senior staffer she was going to do to them if Holder didn’t get on this investigation immediately.

jon1979 on November 30, 2010 at 9:53 AM

Every decision Barack Obama and Eric Holder make is based on just two things: politics and race.

bw222 on November 30, 2010 at 9:54 AM

If the Aussies take Assange’s passport, it could be interesting, although they would need some legal basis to revoke a native-born citizen’s passport. Wethal on November 30, 2010 at 9:34 AM

There are Aussie troops in Afghanistan, mite.

Akzed on November 30, 2010 at 9:55 AM

Holder is a complete and utter moron and is a disgrace to the office.

WisCon on November 30, 2010 at 9:58 AM

At least some of the material released by Wikileaks is covered by laws protecting classified information, and those laws have been upheld in the past against First Amendment challenges.

That’s good enough. Now go find him.

RepubChica on November 30, 2010 at 10:00 AM

If Obama really wanted to get rid of Assange all he has to is:

- Release some materials to Wikileaks related to Putin
- Announce that we have a person in custody that released the info
- Wait for Putin to act

faraway on November 30, 2010 at 10:02 AM

prosecutions involving leaked classified information are difficult because the Espionage Act is a 1917 statute that preceded Supreme Court cases that expanded First Amendment protections.

And nobody in our federal legislature has had time in the last few decades to update that 1917 statute to reflect those expanded First Amendment protections, or the many new ways in which information can be stolen/transmitted in the digital age.

No, our federal lawmakers have been way too busy passing laws about more important stuff — like which types of lightbulbs we should be allowed to buy.

National security is so last century.

AZCoyote on November 30, 2010 at 10:03 AM

Ok guys. this is a prime example of how a general election will be if we nominate Mitt or some other squish. Not one of those heavy hitters have taken the battle to Obama over these wikileaks. Not one. Not one pinned the blame on the Obama admin and placed them on the denfensive. Not one thought to showcase the failure of liberalism by the use of this event. NOT ONE. Not one thought to put Personal responsibility onto any of the players in this game. Much like after 9/11 not one person in authority was held responsibile for the failure at every level of the government. Not ONE. The establishment does not want to place responsibility on Obama because then they will have to take responsibility for their failures.

the only person at the national level that immediatedly placed the blame were it belongs at the top (the buck stops here) is the OUTSIDER Gov Palin.

DC is full of self serving snakes that duck and hide from personal responsibility while they hold their fangs into the throat of the nation bleeding us dry. So go ahead and nominate a Mitt or a barbour and expect another 4 years of Obama and if a mircle should happen and they win by not attacking Obama then expect another 4 years of leaderless leadership when no one takes the blame nothing changes and we drift further along toward socialism, because at its heart socialism means never taking personal responsibility.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:03 AM

I am not making this up. Mark Knoller tweeted this earlier: Attorney General Holder heads to Zurich, Switzerland tomorrow to lobby to bring the World Cup to the U.S. in 2022.

debg on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Clinton probed Argentine leader’s ‘nerves,’ ‘anxiety,’ ‘stress’

OmahaConservative on November 30, 2010 at 9:58 AM

To be honest, this doesn’t bother me a bit. It’s completely unsurprising. Diplomacy is the art and science of exerting a national will in an effective manner. If someone’s weakness is “anxiety” and there is national will to be exerted, I would be disappointed of our State Dept failed to identify these opportunities or openings in a leader. This is not new news. Matter of fact, I’m quite certain that the CIA used physicians to evaluate the health of world leaders, not because they cared about them, but to build a complete profile about them as a means to exert the national will. It’s been done on Castro, Brezhnev, Gorbachev, Khaddafi, Hussein and so on. It’s merely an extension of Sun Tzu’s axiom “Know Thine Enemy.”

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Wikileaks?

Is that like, umm, an Oil Spill??

Hey, Prezdint Toonces is all over it, then!!!!

VelvetElvis on November 30, 2010 at 10:06 AM

Priorities debg, priorities……

cmsinaz on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Glenn Beck believes Soros is behind this…and it is all being done on purpose. So why would Holder stop it…if the puppet master is in charge.

Making Hillary look bad plays into 2012 for Obama too.

djn on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

debg on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

SMART POWER!!!!!

VelvetElvis on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

Well, Ed.

President in Exile Sarah Palin has demanded “full criminal investigation” of Assange and his minions.

So … Resident Obama has no choice but to follow her orders.

So there.

TheAlamos on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

VelvetElvis on November 30, 2010 at 10:06 AM

Daddy did you plug the hole yet?

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

debg on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

typical. Isn’t the Olympics coming to Chicago?/sarc

ORconservative on November 30, 2010 at 10:08 AM

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

I like her hardball spying as well. Her choice of language in the request however, was less than diplomatic.

OmahaConservative on November 30, 2010 at 10:08 AM

I am not making this up. Mark Knoller tweeted this earlier: Attorney General Holder heads to Zurich, Switzerland tomorrow to lobby to bring the World Cup to the U.S. in 2022.

debg on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Mama Grizzly MM made this as her headline for today.

TheAlamos on November 30, 2010 at 10:09 AM

djn on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

yeah hillary came out of this looking clueless. but I think its more about them going after a certain idealogy. None of these show liberalsim in a bad light. they are all directed at discreding nationalism and countries that are pro-war and of course the USA.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:10 AM

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

but did you notice WHY she wanted the spying done?

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

One world government is the answer.

/

faraway on November 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

yeah hillary came out of this looking clueless. but I think its more about them going after a certain idealogy. None of these show liberalsim in a bad light. they are all directed at discreding nationalism and countries that are pro-war and of course the USA.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:10 AM

Except that they all look INCOMPETENT and that’s politically bad!

TheAlamos on November 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

On the other hand, Assange may have a defense against selective prosecution, since the US government never prosecuted newspapers and reporters in the US that published national-security secrets, most notably the New York Times and the Washington Post.

As a foreign enemy, girlie man should be extremely limited in having recourse in any of our laws and precedents. Just sayin’.

RepubChica on November 30, 2010 at 10:13 AM

HEY EVERYBODY- Stop picking on Obama & Holder. They have been BUSY with basketball games and filing lawsuits to stop music downloads and to protect illegal aliens from that mean state of Arizona. Now that the Wikileaks damage is done they are looking into doing something…..

3dpuzzman on November 30, 2010 at 10:13 AM

Making Hillary look bad plays into 2012 for Obama too.

djn on November 30, 2010 at 10:07 AM

good point. She’s being tattooed (unfairly I might add) with the future title of “Former First Lady and Senator and Disgraced Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.”

because really, what’d she do? If it emerges that the puppetmaster is behind this (and I suppose he is) then the Clinton wagon-circling exercise is going to begin and Jimmy Carville is going to be back in bizness.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:15 AM

Except that they all look INCOMPETENT and that’s politically bad!

TheAlamos on November 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

well yes that is what is coming across but that was not the INTENTION of these leaks.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:16 AM

but did you notice WHY she wanted the spying done?

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

to blackmail them?…I’m not surprised. The methods are nothing new, the information is nothing new–but her motivations on how to use that information is pure Clintonian and still, unsurprising.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 AM

but did you notice WHY she wanted the spying done?

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:12 AM

Hillary, being an Allinsky pupil, always love spying.

Remember, it was Hillary who orchestrated the “spying” of Bill Clinton’s enemies in 1996 primaries.

Hillary’s psyche always wanted to take advantage of information against her enemies and those that she deals with.

It’s the insecurity within her own psyche. People like Hillary don’t sleep well at night… coz they’re paranoid.

TheAlamos on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 AM

Come off it, Ed, nothing can make Hillary blush.

Fortunata on November 30, 2010 at 10:21 AM

It great that Obama hasn’t done anything embarrassing regarding France, the British Queen, the 2008 election, Israel, Gaza, China, or about that BP oil because if any cables were released they might make him look bad.

Good thing none of that happened, huh?

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 10:24 AM

Oh please, like Holder is actually going to do anything. Just have a Predator drop a hellfire on him and his buddies. Stop screwing around. You think the Russians would take this crap?

Iblis on November 30, 2010 at 10:25 AM

Aha, so now we know how to get the Obama administration to act: Just embarrass them publicly.

And we know that Wikileaks could publish every military secret America has, and it would not embarrass the Obama administration. But make Obama administration officials personally look like sneaky liars, and it’s Katie-bar-the-door.

Is it 2012 yet?

Aitch748 on November 30, 2010 at 10:26 AM

Oh please, like Holder is actually going to do anything. Just have a Predator drop a hellfire on him and his buddies. Stop screwing around. You think the Russians would take this crap?

Iblis on November 30, 2010 at 10:25 AM

there is a precedent for having people plead guilty and then the DOJ dropping all charges against them. I’m sure it won’t be that way this time around tho’…../

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:28 AM

TheAlamos on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 AM

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 AM

Was it for the good of the country or good for Clinton? or for the democratic party. I’m saying the memos do not release the WHY for clinton requesting this information. Look a tthe Gitmo memos. Obama leaned on other nations to except prisoners from Gitmo. WHY? it was not a national security concern. Gitmo while having some bad PR for the country was not worth straining relations with our allies over it would not have helped America in the slightest but it would have helped Obama and the democratic party politically. Or in other words our foriegn policy is now seen to be directed at not helping the country but helping a politcal party.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:29 AM

At least an indictment would start the ball rolling on arresting or capturing Assange and his Wikileaks team to stop any further damage to American security.

How is embarassing Hilldog and Obamas cronies at state a threat to the US exactly?

snoopicus on November 30, 2010 at 10:29 AM

So it turns out the big wheels of the Obama administration sit around the Oval Office, having a smoke and asking one another, “Is this a big deal? Do you think this is a big deal? Does the NYT think this is a big deal? Who’s turn is it to decide if this is a big deal? What sap hasn’t taken a fall in awhile? Are we SURE this is a big deal?”

I hate Obama.

anniekc on November 30, 2010 at 10:31 AM

Or in other words our foriegn policy is now seen to be directed at not helping the country but helping a politcal party.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:29 AM

that’s still not new news. While its a raw revelation, its not surprising in the least. If the democrats are in power and they score a foreign policy win, then naturally democrats as a whole benefit from that. It certainly does go against the axiom that “politics stop at the waters edge” but look at the people we’re dealing with. They’ll sell out their own aunt, grandmother etc. to score a cheap political point.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 AM

[ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:17 AM]

Remember, Craig Livingstone? Remember the 900 FBI files?

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 AM

“Waiting until this moment to start pursuing an indictment is a demonstration of impotence and incompetency.”

Incompetence, yes. Impotence, no. This administration has been busily screwing the Nation for two years now.

Yoop on November 30, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Meanwhile there are two black panther thugs walking around free.
Bishop on November 30, 2010 at 9:48 AM

My 1st thought also.

Wade on November 30, 2010 at 10:36 AM

Remember, Craig Livingstone? Remember the 900 FBI files?

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 AM

nope. whatup?

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:38 AM

They’ll sell out their own aunt, grandmother etc. to score a cheap political point.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:34 AM

true but and maybe I’m not expalining it very well. but theses memos tell every nation around the world that our foriegn policy is no longer based on decades of allies and secure principles. these memos are telling the world that the USA can not be trusted to deal with them from administration to administration. Up until Obama countries could be pretty secure in how the USa would view them and thier govenrments. Now its not about the USa its about Obama or Clinton or the democratic party. There is no core to USA foriegn policy anymore. IT’s not based on anything but the ehims of the “emperor” of the moment.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM

Impotence, no. This administration has been busily screwing the Nation for two years now.

Yoop on November 30, 2010 at 10:36 AM

you can’t state that yet. We have to see if all that screwing brings a new life into the world. Hopefully it is falling on unfertile ground

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:43 AM

There is no core to USA foriegn policy anymore. IT’s not based on anything but the whims of the “emperor” of the moment.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 10:42 AM

I’m not sure that this isn’t any different than in the past. For example, 20 mins after Reagan was elected the Iranian hostages were released because the Iranians knew there was a knew sheriff in town, and he was not to be messed with. At the diplomatic level, the US is likely no different than any other country in their backhanded tactics in dealing with people. How else have we obtained such a “vile” reputation with many countries?

I believe the US is more admired with how we elect and transfer power amongst ourselves than how we handle diplomatic lackeys and Argentinian leaders bra sizes. The only difference today is that it is US diplo-info that is being leaked and not that of other countries. This is an information attack upon our sovereignty.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:51 AM

If you think the Assman can be convicted in a US court, tell me what he has done that the New York Times hasn’t done many times.

slickwillie2001 on November 30, 2010 at 10:58 AM

If you think the Assman can be convicted in a US court, tell me what he has done that the New York Times hasn’t done many times.

slickwillie2001 on November 30, 2010 at 10:58 AM

I’m certain that even if he gets charged individuallly for all of these documents that, even if one charge sticks, it’ll be a huge win for the administration.
/

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 11:04 AM

HEY EVERYBODY- Stop picking on Obama & Holder. They have been BUSY with basketball games and filing lawsuits to stop music downloads and to protect illegal aliens from that mean state of Arizona. Now that the Wikileaks damage is done they are looking into doing something…..

3dpuzzman on November 30, 2010 at 10:13 AM

Maybe we could prosecute the kid more readily if we had just put a ‘Copyright’ in the signature of every email and report written.

slickwillie2001 on November 30, 2010 at 11:06 AM

Holder is hedging his bets. He said yesterday at the news conference:

To the extent that we can find anybody who was involved in the breaking of American law, who put at risk the assets and the people I have described, they will be held responsible; they will be held accountable.

kingsjester on November 30, 2010 at 11:07 AM

I am not convinced that this isn’t just a lot of bloviation on the part of the Obama regime. They has an established history of talking tough but not actually following through with the tough talk. I have a feeling this is yet another example of this. Time will tell.

Carl on November 30, 2010 at 11:08 AM

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:51 AM

I know I’m not explaining it well, I see your point but…this isn’t releasing hostages because of fear. this shows a willingness to abandoned core american concerns for the self fullfillment of one individual.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 11:09 AM

Maybe we could prosecute the kid more readily if we had just put a ‘Copyright’ in the signature of every email and report written.

slickwillie2001 on November 30, 2010 at 11:06 AM

and then set them all to music (especially if it were Jay-Z or Conway West) then we could seize upon Wikileaks and shut them down). //

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 11:09 AM

nope. whatup?

[ted c on November 30, 2010 at 10:38 AM]

Filegate: Craig Livingstone, director of the White House’s Office of Personnel Security,[3](me: during the Clinton Administration) improperly requested, and received from the FBI, background reports without asking permission of the subject individuals. Estimates range from 400 to 700 to 900 unauthorized file disclosures.

It’s not the first time a Clinton, and likely Hillary that time, was doing this. The Clinton Admin also generated several controversies with lax security and handing out clearances willy-nilly.

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 11:10 AM

I know I’m not explaining it well, I see your point but…this isn’t releasing hostages because of fear. this shows a willingness to abandoned core american concerns for the self fullfillment of one individual.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 11:09 AM

I gotcha. Politics isn’t stopping at the water’s edge any longer.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 11:10 AM

It’s not the first time a Clinton, and likely Hillary that time, was doing this. The Clinton Admin also generated several controversies with lax security and handing out clearances willy-nilly.

Dusty on November 30, 2010 at 11:10 AM

Information security to democrats is valued insofar as border security is valued.

The only information they secure is the kind that can be used against their enemies.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 11:13 AM

WikiLeaks, the website that published a quarter-million sensitive diplomatic cables on Sunday, is using Amazon.com Inc. servers in the U.S. to help deliver its information. It sounds like an odd choice, but it could make sense.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/11/29/wikileaks-using-amazon-servers-after-attack/

This whole thing sounds like BS to me.

There is something very wrong with what is being claimed here.

And even more amusing? PirateBay.org is helping Wikileaks to distribute the documents. Do recall that more than 70 similar sites were shut down by the US government, but they are helpless in this situation?

And in Sweden with those servers?

Viborg, who has a Swedish law degree and has served as a legal advisor to popular filesharing website The Pirate Bay, said PRQ had yet to be contacted by Swedish or US authorities about WikiLeaks’ activities.

sharrukin on November 30, 2010 at 11:20 AM

Most inept administration ever. And I mean that seriously.

They should have thrown everything at Asange with the very first leak. But hey, that wasn’t a big deal because it was primarily aimed at George Bush and his “failed” policies (even though the leaks confirmed the WMD and proved the “he lied” myth is bogus).

Now that the Obama administration is under scrutiny, he wants something done.

This man doesn’t care about America or America’s interest. He only cares about himself. Period.

We’ve elected a narcissist and it’s ruining this country. He HAS to go in 2012.

ButterflyDragon on November 30, 2010 at 11:26 AM

I gotcha. Politics isn’t stopping at the water’s edge any longer.

ted c on November 30, 2010 at 11:10 AM

yeah that says it as well as any.

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 11:29 AM

s 510 passed the federal government just took over another section of our economy and no one cares….

unseen on November 30, 2010 at 11:31 AM

I agreed with Sarah Palin on this one. Why didn’t the administration do something proactive in August, when it was clear what was coming?

It’s not like Wikileaks hid what was going to land.

She makes a good point.

AnninCA on November 30, 2010 at 11:36 AM

Eric Holder, just like Barry. Always a day late and a dollar short.

GarandFan on November 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM

Barry is just keeping up appearances, nothing more. Wikileaks is useful to Barry as it may provide cover and an excuse for another takeover.

anXdem on November 30, 2010 at 9:51 AM

It could have been because the “embarrassing” statements by Hillary hadn’t been leaked yet.

I think she’s fixing to be tossed out on her butt. What’s really weird is that I almost feel sorry for her.

Squiggy on November 30, 2010 at 11:45 AM

It would be fun to claim that Eric Holder is the single worst Attorney General in decades, or maybe ever, except for the inconvenient fact that Presidents for ages have treated this appointment not as a uniquely important law enforcement position, but as some sort of patronage opportunity for loyal friends or valued political fundraisers.

There have been so many worthless douchebags who served as Attorney General that Holder’s appointment almost seems viable, rather than the outrageous affirmative action calamity that it is.

Ramsey Clark comes to mind, but of course the best example is Alberto Gonzalez, Bush’s foray into Hispandering stupidity. Bobby Kennedy is the worst, if only because his idiot brother named him, but how about Janet Reno? Or Ashcroft?

Jaibones on November 30, 2010 at 11:47 AM

I am not making this up. Mark Knoller tweeted this earlier: Attorney General Holder heads to Zurich, Switzerland tomorrow to lobby to bring the World Cup to the U.S. in 2022.

debg on November 30, 2010 at 10:04 AM

Next up, a tour of the world’s major golf courses to search for the Real Leaker.

Lily on November 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Maybe they ought to re-check Assange’s carbon footprint.

TimBuk3 on November 30, 2010 at 11:56 AM

Seems to me,AssLeaky was helping Hopey destroy America’s
Wars by Intel Release type proxy,and yet,his Administra
tion staff were aware of the leaks,and yet no one lifted
a finger!!

canopfor on November 30, 2010 at 9:46 AM

I believe this is what Glenn Beck pointed out in his TV program yesterday – it was very enlightening showing all the usual suspects (Soros, Tides foundation, & many more) involved.

silvernana on November 30, 2010 at 12:02 PM

Priorities…why is Holder outside the country lobbying for the World Cup?

nor on November 30, 2010 at 12:26 PM

yes Wikileaks announced their next target is a US Bank and lo and behold Team Obama suddenly raises criminal charges. TBTF rang their little bell and they jumped to obey. Frakkers.

ginaswo on November 30, 2010 at 12:30 PM

Comment pages: 1 2