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:

Wikileaks-Manning-Lamo Interview Transcripts

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?

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.

Admiral Michael Mullen claims Wikileaks doesn’t understand how small pieces of information can create a new understanding. To the contrary, Wikileaks appears to understand this quite well.