If Biden is committed to the First Amendment, he must stop the persecution of Julian Assange
February 25, 2021
If Biden is as serious about the truth as he claims to be, he should stop pursuing espionage charges against publisher and journalist Julian Assange. Assange is the founder of WikiLeaks, an organization that publishes documents leaked by corporate and government whistleblowers all around the globe. The Biden DOJ announced that it will continue to pursue the extradition of Assange from the UK to the US. Were Assange to be extradited and charged in the US for obtaining and publishing classified information, it would pose an unspeakably grave threat to freedom of the press and the First Amendment.
WikiLeaks initially garnered attention in 2010 when they released the Afghan War Diary; these files revealed war crimes on the part of the United States and coalition forces stationed in Afghanistan. Another well-known release is a video titled “Collateral Murder” that shows a US Army helicopter firing on an unarmed crowd in Baghdad. Two Reuters journalists were among those killed in the attack, as were several people who came in vans to pick up and assist the wounded — a glaring example of a war crime.
WikiLeaks’ format allows them, in their words, to report “the vast range of small tragedies that are almost never reported by the press but which account for the overwhelming majority of deaths and injuries [in war]” — they can bypass a corporate media that acts as a filter through which governments manage public perception in democratic societies. At this time, WikiLeaks was an immensely popular organization among liberals in the West, as evidenced by the standing ovation Assange received at a 2010 TedTalk in London.
Since then, there has been a concerted defamation campaign against WikiLeaks, and in particular, Assange — including rape allegations we now know to have been fabricated by Swedish police; now-discredited claims of meetings with Paul Manafort and Russian spies to hack the DNC; and baseless claims that he smeared feces on the walls of the Ecuadorian embassy in which he was confined for seven years. Furthermore, Assange was secretly and illegally surveilled 24/7 by the CIA during those seven years of political asylum in the embassy.
There is, however, extensive evidence that the US has been conducting an all-out war against Assange, his family and WikiLeaks for about a decade. In fact, Wikileaks itself obtained leaked emails from American private intelligence firm Stratfor (longtime US federal government partners) that show an intention to “move him from country to country to face various charges for the next 25 years … [and] seize everything he and his family own.”
Assange was yanked out of the Embassy by British police in 2019 and, on a decade-old bail violation, was thrown in solitary in what has been called Britain’s Guantanamo Bay. UN official Nils Melzer visited him there, accompanied by two expert doctors who both independently concluded that Assange showed signs of prolonged psychological torture.

In this case, the UK and US governments’ message to dissidents is clear: those who expose crimes will be considered criminals, while those who commit them at the highest levels can do so with impunity. If we can convince the public that Assange is a sexually-violent sociopath, and if we can keep him arbitrarily imprisoned and psychologically tortured for years, the same or worse can happen to you — so keep your mouth shut.
We in the West cannot allow our governments to treat dissidents in this way. If we do, we really are no better than China or Saudi Arabia. If the US wants to market itself on the world stage as a defender of a free press and of human rights, it must stop pursuing espionage charges against Julian Assange for conducting journalism. The importance of this case cannot be understated, for what is at stake here is our very right to live in a free society and our right to know what our governments are doing.
Free Assange NOW and pay him compensation!!!
Julian Assange is not a “high-tech terrorist” as President Biden has asserted in the past (see here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF8WRFw5sHQ), nor is he himself a whistleblower, as some of his supporters have sought to characterize him (for example, see here: https://www.rte.ie/news/2019/1119/1093917-julian-assange-bio/). He is simply a publisher using a non-traditional platform and methodology to release materials provided to him by third-party sources such as Chelsea Manning, Rudolf Elmer and others to the public, and thereby promote the transparency that is the bedrock of any free society, not least our own.
Assange has made demonstrable efforts to prevent or mitigate any potential harm from WikiLeaks’ disclosures (see here: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2020/12/16/leak_recording_of_julian_assange_asking_clinton_state_department_for_help_mitigating_damage_of_unintentional_data_dump.html, and here: https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/julian-assange-aimed-for-stringent-redactions-extradition-court-hears-20200917-p55ws5.html). Meanwhile, estranged collaborators from Daniel Domscheit-Berg (https://www.fastcompany.com/1726697/openleaks-wikileaks-smackdown-reveals-theft-and-foul-play-leak-land) to John Young’s Cryptome (https://www.theguardian.com/media/2020/sep/24/us-never-asked-wikileaks-rival-cryptome-remove-leaked-cables-court-told-assange) to Luke Harding and David Leigh of The Guardian (https://unspecified.wordpress.com/2011/09/03/wikileaks-password-leak-faq/) have been far less cautious about the manner in which they handled the release of WikiLeaks’ materials, and yet have not faced prosecution (nor should they). As even the likes of former Defense Secretary Robert Gates (https://www.politico.com/blogs/under-the-radar/2010/11/gates-shrugs-off-wikileaks-cable-dump-031076) and Brigadier General Robert Carr (https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/07/us-cant-connect-single-death-bradley-mannings-leaks/312643/) have conceded, WikiLeaks’ releases have not generated significant adverse effects (whether endangering lives or otherwise). In any case, a country that could ultimately permit the publication of hydrogen bomb blueprints (see “United States of America v. Progressive, Inc.” case) should certainly not interfere with the journalistic activities of an organization such as WikiLeaks.
Prosecuting Assange runs an enormous risk of creating a socio-legal precedent that will dangerously diminish the already flagging vitality of our First Amendment protections (see here: https://theconversation.com/is-the-assange-indictment-a-threat-to-the-first-amendment-115420, and here: https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/welcome-post-constitutional-america/), and contribute to similar prosecutions of publishers and journalists the world over (as has seemingly already occurred in states such as Australia and France: https://consortiumnews.com/2019/06/05/after-assanges-espionage-act-indictment-police-move-against-more-journalists-for-publishing-classified-material/). Moreover, Assange’s attorney-client privilege has been thoroughly compromised (see here: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-02-23/surveillance-of-julian-assange-captured-lawyers-conversations/11985872), rendering a fair trial impossible in tandem with demonstrable practices such as “parallel construction” (for example, see here: https://theintercept.com/2018/01/09/dark-side-fbi-dea-illegal-searches-secret-evidence/).
For further evidence challenging the erroneous charges and allegations against Julian Assange, readers can consult this helpful laundry-list:
https://caityjohnstone.medium.com/debunking-all-the-assange-smears-a549fd677cac
Journalists don’t hack into government computers. Journalists don’t do deals with Russian government hackers
Anyone else remember when Julian tried to cover up the Panama papers, because they affected Putin and the Oilarchs?
He’s not a journalist
Hi Christopher, the claims you’re making are simply false.
There is no evidence that Julian Assange hacked into government computers. What he did do was advise Chelsea Manning on how to obfuscate her own identity in computer logs so as to not give away the fact that she was the one who withdrew the evidence of war crimes. This was an act of source protection, not hacking. Chelsea Manning did not have to hack any computers, she was already employed by the US military.
There is no evidence at all to suggest that Julian Assange worked with the Russian state; in fact, the US government has not even made that allegation. Since the CIA conducted constant surveillance, one would think they would have very damning video evidence of such collusion — yet none has manifested.
As to your point on the Panama Papers, Assange himself actually argued in favor of the further release of relevant documents — the ICIJ released 1% of the papers, Assange urged them to publish the rest. This is all publicly available information: https://www.dw.com/en/wikileaks-slams-panama-papers-trickle-down-strategy/a-19170435
Christopher, the claims you are making are contradicted by literally all of the publicly available evidence. The next time you care to make such dramatic and inflammatory claims, please be sure to back them up with evidence.
Also, I would be very curious to know who you are — I’ve searched you up on Whitman’s website and there is no Christopher Mooney to be found. I’ve likewise googled your profile picture and name, and have found no other trace of you on the internet. If you live in Walla Walla, I’d be very happy to buy you a coffee and discuss the Assange case further with you.