There’s something odd about the timeline of Bradley Manning’s alleged leaks to WikiLeaks: he appears to give WikiLeaks at least two things — the Rejkjavik 13 cable and the Collateral Murder video — before he verified Julian Assange’s identity.
|By: emptywheel Tuesday January 11, 2011 12:35 pm|
|By: Jane Hamsher Friday December 31, 2010 11:45 am|
FDL readers have been working collectively on a Citizen Journalism project to transcribe interviews relevant to Wikileaks, Adrian Lamo and Bradley Manning. The transcripts have been compiled on one page, which is available now:
|By: emptywheel Friday December 31, 2010 7:05 am|
It’s just a data point — but the story of Adrian Lamo being involuntarily hospitalized in response to reporting having his laptop taken is a whole lot different than it is if he has just had his drugs taken away.
|By: emptywheel Thursday December 30, 2010 3:45 pm|
To my mind, there are several questions that remain entirely unanswered:
- When did Lamo and Manning start communicating?
- When and through whom did Lamo contact authorities (or, did authorities find him and not vice versa)?
- How does that relate to other dates, such as Manning’s arrest, and when did the arrest happen?
|By: Cynthia Kouril Thursday December 30, 2010 12:45 pm|
A conspiracy requires an agreement between two people, a partnership in crime. So far, there’s been no proof offered that Manning ever communicated directly with Assange — so how could they form a meeting of the minds? And how can U.S. Department of Justice realistically make a conspiracy charge involving WikiLeaks and Manning without this meeting of the minds?
|By: Jane Hamsher Wednesday December 29, 2010 12:30 pm|
I’m not sure why Wired editor Evan Hansen thinks FDL transcribing interviews and logging articles qualifies as “discrediting Lamo.” Lamo’s own words and actions are responsible for any indictment being made in the press, and Wired’s decision to sit on the chat logs makes them an active participant in whatever claims Lamo makes about their contents.
And if Hansen doesn’t think the credibility of the key source for Wired’s reporting on this story can hold up when simply compared to his own words, I’d say they’ve got bigger problems than Glenn Greenwald.
|By: Jane Hamsher Tuesday December 28, 2010 9:30 am|
You would have to have been f%ing r#*&rded to believe that in an era of unprecedented intolerance for press leaks of any kind, that the U.S. Army Criminal Investigation Division, the FBI, the NSA, the U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations and the Cyber Defense Crime Center knowingly and willingly not only allowed convicted hacker Adrian Lamo to hold on to chat logs that contained sensitive classified information, but to distribute them unexpurgated to the press.
|By: Jane Hamsher Tuesday December 28, 2010 6:30 am|
Our latest challenge was the compilation of all media that contained source material to date. Since Lamo is by no stretch of the imagination publicity shy, and has given interviews to anyone willing to sit still, that proved to be a somewhat ambitious undertaking. We have now published a sortable table of articles relevant to the Manning-Wikileaks story, which we will continue to add material to. You can find that table here:
|By: Jane Hamsher Monday December 27, 2010 9:30 am|
We here at FDL headquarters have spent a productive holiday season putting together data banks of information relevant to the Wikileaks-Bradley Manning- Adrian Lamo story. It feels like “Plame II, Electric Boogaloo,” because not since Scooter Libby has a story been so full of holes, contradictions and completely implausible events. And the journalism involved (if that’s what you want to call it) makes Judy Miller look like I.F. Stone.
|By: emptywheel Sunday December 26, 2010 3:45 pm|
The first suspicious moment in the chats between Adrian Lamo and Bradley Manning occurred at 12:54 on May 22–ostensibly the second day of chat communication between them (though Manning had sent Lamo encrypted emails for an unspecified period of time before that point).