WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange returned to his homeland Australia aboard a charter jet on Wednesday, hours after pleading guilty to obtaining and publishing U.S. military secrets in a deal with Justice Department prosecutors that concludes a drawn-out legal saga.

The criminal case of international intrigue, which had played out for years, came to a surprise end in a most unusual setting with Assange, 52, entering his plea in a U.S. district court in Saipan, the capital of the Northern Mariana Islands. The American commonwealth in the Pacific is relatively close to Assange’s native Australia and accommodated his desire to avoid entering the continental United States.

Assange was accused of receiving and publishing hundreds of thousands of war logs and diplomatic cables that included details of U.S. military wrongdoing in Iraq and Afghanistan. His activities drew an outpouring of support from press freedom advocates, who heralded his role in bringing to light military conduct that might otherwise have been concealed from view and warned of a chilling effect on journalists. Among the files published by WikiLeaks was a video of a 2007 Apache helicopter attack by American forces in Baghdad that killed 11 people, including two Reuters journalists.

Assange raised his right fist as he emerged for the plane and his supporters at the Canberra airport cheered from a distance. Dressed in the same suit and tie he wore during his earlier court appearance, he embraced his wife Stella Assange and father John Shipton who were waiting on the tarmac.

  • ElderberryLow@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    35
    arrow-down
    137
    ·
    4 days ago

    Dude got off easy lol. He should spend the rest of his days counting his lucky stars or whatever god he believes in.

    • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      97
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      4 days ago

      12 years in prison is more than you get for killing a child while drunk driving

      The man embarrassed the US by leaking their DMs.

      • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        57
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        It’s a bit more than embarrassment. Some of what he exposed was absolutely horrific. Other leaks directly compromised confidential war and spy intelligence that directly led to the execution of informants. There had to be consequences for the latter. Had he responsibly redacted names, as a journalist should, I may have had a different opinion.

        • ikidd@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          14
          ·
          4 days ago

          The intelligence leaks were via media outlets that didn’t sanitize the publications. It was up to them to do what was needed on that front. And in the end, nobody has shown that those failures to censor information had anything like the consequences to intelligence assets that Libby/Cheney’s leaks had.

            • Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              Source on the executions? I found that informants were named and when warned that this could result in their deaths Assange basically said, “lol, snitches get stitches.”

              That said, I couldn’t find anything about the informants actually being executed.

                • June (she/her) 🫐@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  9
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  The Insurance section on that article is extremely interesting. I wonder if/when we will be able to crack into that potential treasure trove. But maybe it’s just 1.4GB of a picture of Julian’s asshole

                • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  So, to clarify, since zero deaths are listed there—we don’t have a source for that claim?

                  • ikidd@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 days ago

                    Exactly my point; there have been no deaths attributed to these leaks by any credible source other than an administration that has variously tried to frame, imprison, assassinate and astroturf Assange, that is directly implicated in warcrimes and has done it’s own leaks of intelligence assets that are actually provably murderous.

                    This is how this whole thing has gone since the start. We still have a group that’s inconsolably upset that Wikileaks exposed their nomination tampering, and will move the goalposts at every turn that shows Assange was on the right side of history.

                • ikidd@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  So, according to your own link, absolutely nothing but unproven allegations.

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          14
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          it was a deliberate understatement for comic effect.

          Still, though, 12 years is only considered proportionate because the the government sets the law and the government was embarrassed.

          Its not a complete defence of Assange, his behaviors, his sketchy connections to Russia - but it is me saying that whistle-blowers are disproportionately punished not because it’s in the public interest

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            17
            arrow-down
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            I disagree that embarrassment was the motivation.

            Leaking the details of classified foreign intelligence operations is considered espionage or treason. Some of those leaks resulted in the execution of informants. Those are not small crimes.

            According to the Espionage Act of 1917, he could have been executed. Imprisonment is standard, but 12 years is far better than the maximum of life in prison.

            https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Espionage

            • ralphio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              Some of those leaks resulted in the execution of informants.

              This is speculation by the US, they were never able to prove this.

            • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              10
              ·
              4 days ago

              Yes but you’re saying “it’s a big crime because the people who stand to benefit from it being a big crime say it’s a big crime.”

              While I’m not saying all and any espionage/treason is good, I’m asking why one would think these memoranda are worth more than human life?

              Were they? Would the world be better off with Assange dead?

              • andyburke@fedia.io
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                10
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                4 days ago

                For the operatives put in danger and/or killed, it was worth human life?

                You seem to be ignoring that Assange either knowingly or unknowingly risked peoples’ lives, people who had often given those lives into great risk in service of their country.

                When the leaks first happened, I was supportive of Wikileaks (a natural position for an anti-war person like me). Later, when it was revealed that there had been no or little due diligence to ensure the information had been vetted and scrubbed, I realized how extreme it can be on both ends of the political spectrum.

                Stop trying to paint this with some large political brush.

                Assange is not a hero. The US government is not innocent.

                • azuth@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  In service of their country? Did the US make them US citizens?

                  Because most US informants were working against their countries in some cases even after the US invaded.

      • Neato@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        The man embarrassed the US by leaking their DMs.

        When you do that to a nation about their classified intel, it’s called espionage. It’s a biiiit more serious than a social media hack.

        In practical terms, espionage can affect thousands of lives directly and change the course of a war. Imagined the shitshow if someone released that kind of info now. It could jeopardize the Ukraine conflict. It’s treated as more serious than murder because it can be.

        • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          4 days ago

          Agreed in principle but it’s been nigh on 20 years and we’re yet to find someone that was killed as an upshot of the leak.

          If you have information to the contrary I’d be keen to hear it.

      • neuracnu@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        DMs containing the identities of spies and assets.

        He also managed to wriggle away from multiple rape charges in Sweden by waiting out the statute of limitations.

        Heroes and villains alike have complex legacies.

    • Senseless@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      Deutsch
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      I probably should know better than to argue with a random stranger on the Internet but I’ll bite… Why do you think he got off easy if he spend 7 years in the Ecuadorian embassy and 5 years in an UK prison, when his sentence is 5 years?

        • tastysnacks@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          The US justice system is rarely that strict. For example, Donlad Trump could get sentenced to decades in prison, but likely won’t spend anytime in jail.

          • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Incarceration is the most extreme sentencing for nonviolent class E felonies without a prior record. The standard sentencing is a fine, community service, and/or probation.

            The standard sentencing for espionage begins with incarceration. It’s just a question of how long, or if they’re deserving of execution.

            • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              I know that’s the norm but you’d think that even with it being the first time he was caught, the 30 count would warrant a more serious response. What would they do if he did this 30 times with a trial between each commitment of a felony? I think that should be a deciding factor even if it’s not likely to be.

              • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 days ago

                It’s thirty counts, but it’s still considered his first offense. They’re not considered consecutive. The only way he’ll see prison for that crime is if he proves to be at risk of committing more crime without “rehabilitative incarceration.” If Merchan reaches too far on his sentencing, it’ll just fuel the bias claim in Trump’s inevitable appeal.

                • JigglySackles@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 days ago

                  I probably have the jargon wrong as I’m no lawyer. But I would still think the count severity should matter more than it does.

                  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    2 days ago

                    Me neither. I’m just repeating what attorneys and judges have publicly said on the matter. We’ll see when the time comes.

      • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        32
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        A real journalist would have redacted the names of Afghani informants so they wouldn’t run the risk of being killed by the Taliban

        • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          4 days ago

          As stated by ikidd above, it was up to the publishers to clean up the releases before printing/posting them.

        • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          4 days ago

          that doesn’t make him not a real journalist. sloppy, unprofessional, maybe, but he’s still a real journalist.

            • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              I’m sorry if this is a bit too unrelated but would you say the same about Snowden?

              I’m not as well informed on Assange but I tend to find the “espionage” criticism lacking, personally, since it seems to mainly favor the generally terrible foreign policy actions of the US empire and not so much the people of the US who are for the most part against those actions but have little recourse what with the 2 party system and having a plutocratic system of government

                • Psychodelic@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  6
                  arrow-down
                  3
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Oh weird, that was not the impression I got from the many comments you made criticizing them for their brave actions.

                  I would tend to blame any negative fallout on the US government, personally. If they weren’t committing atrocities regular people wouldn’t have had to take the huge risk/be put at risk.

                  It’s like getting upset at a victim of police brutality for not working with the police

                  • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    4 days ago

                    Their actions were brave until they became clouded by fame. Then both of them made it about leverage and made crucial mistakes that lead to threatened lives. I supported them in the past, prior to their dangerous missteps. I no longer comment in support of either of them.

                    A good example of responsible whistleblowing would be from the recent resignations from the Department of Defense. They gave very detailed accounts of information suppression while they were tasked with collecting information on civilian casualties in Gaza. None of the information they disclosed exposed confidential informants or put lives at risk.

                    It’s not just possible to be a responsible whistleblower, it’s imperative.

              • disguy_ovahea@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                13
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                4 days ago

                He leaked unredacted confidential information that directly led to the assassination of Afghani informants.

                That’s a little more than just “sloppy journalism.”

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                4 days ago

                He helped a government get the candidate of their choice elected by manipulation of data dumps and spent a month before the election screaming how he had more dirt on one candidate.

                  • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    Don’t gaslight me. I remember that Russian agent in October 2016 yelling about Hillary Clinton and stuff he said he had on her. Literally every single time I heard, read, or watched the news his fucking face was there going on and on about the embassy bombing or the emails.

                    Sorry your boy sucks Putin off but I am willing to bet when he does the condom doesn’t mysteriously break.

                • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I object to the supposition that Russia wanted trump to win. I believe Russia wanted Americans divided and trump was simply a means to that end.

          • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            13
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            4 days ago

            Sloppy would be missing some punctuation and grammar. The guy has blood on his hands just like the US government does. Also, he aided (some would say manipulated) Manning in her leak of the documents in a way that no journalist would or should do. Journalists report the story, Assange has repeatedly shown himself to be a self aggrandizer that is the story.

              • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                8
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                4 days ago

                I never said it was. Aiding someone in exfiltrating classified documents on the other hand decidedly is. Not something journalists make a habit of doing, either.

                • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  5
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Journalists do it all the time. That’s where they used unnamed sources and have gone to jail to protect those sources. Or maybe you’re too young to remember Deep Throat.

                  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    7
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    I know who deep throat is. There’s a big difference between refusing to cooperate with an investigation and name names of confidential sources that have provided information versus actively aiding a person in absconding with information. The courts agree with me too, considering John Lawrence was released after a day by an appellate court. Also notable that his charge was merely contempt whereas Assange’s was espionage.

                  • NOT_RICK@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    I’d say because most follow an ethics code, as much as I feel there was a public interest in those documents coming out, but with proper sanitation to protect lives.

                • commie@lemmy.dbzer0.com
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  7
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Aiding someone in exfiltrating classified documents on the other hand decidedly is.

                  but shouldn’t be if the goal is to expose wrongdoing in a journalistic publication.

      • ganksy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        31
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Journalists do not pick sides. He had email from the RNC and DNC via Russian government sponsored hacks. He chose to release only DNC emails to the benefit of pro Putin candidate Trump. Edit word

        Edit edit: can’t find any info on RNC hacks parallel to the DNC ones

        • ralphio@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Could you explain why Russia would give him the RNC emails if they didn’t want them published? I’ve seen this claim go unchallenged many times.

          • ganksy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            I can’t explain their motives. I can only say WikiLeaks had them but did not release.

            Edit: nope can’t say that. Apparently that was just an embolism. Nothing to see here just mopping up my pride.

            • ralphio@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              4 days ago

              Typing this into duckduckgo shows me nothing about the them having the RNC emails:

              did wikileaks have rnc emails

              Not a single link. Please provide the link that says they had them. If you can’t read in between the lines, I’m saying what you said is untrue but gets repeated constantly.

              • ganksy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                4 days ago

                You’re right. I absolutely cannot find that wikileaks had RNC info. I’ve searched quite a bit determined to find what I remember but nada.

                There is this but about DCLeaks having but releasing a bit of republican info on Trump’s primary challengers

                On August 12, 2016, DCLeaks released roughly 300 emails from Republican targets, including the 2016 campaign staff of Arizona Senator John McCain, South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, and 2012 presidential candidate and former Minnesota Representative Michele Bachmann.[13] The release included 18 emails from the Illinois Republican Party.[18]

                But that is not what I remember and certainly doesn’t help my case.

                I apologize. Either my memory fails me or I was mislead (or both). Certainly does not refute Assange being a channel for Russia to get trump elected but does make me look like a tool.

                • ralphio@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  Appreciate the reply. And sorry for being a bit of a dick about it. It’s just one of my pet peeves since seeing it repeated for years.

                  • ganksy@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    3
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    4 days ago

                    I think you were perfectly reserved in your response. It helped me not dig in or just blow it off and not respond. Thanks!

        • luckystarr@feddit.org
          link
          fedilink
          Deutsch
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          Journalists do and can pick sides. If you only ever report the opinion of the ruling party you’re a spokesperson and no journalist.

          The “sides” may be political, moral or ideological. You’re still a journalist.

          If this were not the case, Fox News world have been shuttered long ago.

          • ganksy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            You don’t report for any party. You report the truth that you find by linking the facts you uncover.

          • ganksy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            Well shit. That is what I remember. All my searches: ‘russia hack RNC’, ‘republican hack’ , ‘RNC hack’, etc. were flooded with 2021 results from a different hack. Nothing from WikiLeaks, DCLeaks, Gucifer, 2016 presidential hack, or 2016 Russia interference yielded anything fruitful.

            Thank you! At least I feel less crazy.