Like all conspiracies, there is likely less here than meets the eye

Erik Kain

Erik writes about video games at Forbes and politics at Mother Jones. He's the contributor of The League though he hasn't written much here lately. He can be found occasionally composing 140 character cultural analysis on Twitter.

Related Post Roulette

7 Responses

  1. Will H. says:

    There’s a third element to conspiracy.
    It requires more than one party.
    A person cannot enter into a conspiracy with themselves, even if operating under various entities.
    Not that it applies in this case.Report

  2. Will H. says:

    It just occurred to me that the most important part of the case against him might well be whether or not he merely publishes government documents or if commentary on those documents is offered on that site.
    Only if there is original content there could he claim to be a journalist.
    While I support what he has done, I know darned well it’s illegal.
    As soon as a document is classified, showing it to someone without clearance is illegal.
    Manning is military personnel. He’s under different rules. And they’re fairly harsh rules, granted.
    I don’t see any way he could come out ahead in this.Report

  3. trizzlor says:

    That the American government would attempt to prosecute a foreign journalist for publishing state secrets is bizarre and deeply troubling. Freedom of the press is evaporating before our eyes, and yet the press barely murmurs in its own defense.

    But they’re not doing this based on what we know so far. Serwer’s slippery slope hypothesis is based on a case that doesn’t yet exist and partially released chatlogs. You’re not doing Manning any good conflating his abhorrent treatment with a non-existent and entirely plausible conspiracy charge.Report

  4. Kolohe says:

    From one point of view, it is in government’s interest for Manning (if he did what he’s accused of doing) to spend the next thirty years making big rocks into little rocks, and for Assange to simulataneuously have complete freedom to live the good life as a public celebrity.

    The stark difference would magnify the “pour encourager les autres” effect.Report

  5. Barry says:

    ED, I’d drop the PS. By now, it’s pretty f*cking clear that those who seem to need it won’t care, and don’t care. It’s a useless apologetic, IMHO.Report