Here's a thought!

Why is it being reported today that the media is so concerned about the impacts to them from the Julian Assange arrest?

The New York Times article today talks about fears that Trump will use this charge against Assange against the main stream media in the US. Interesting that the New York Times would take a 1st amendment position here, since they actively promote anti-1st amendment rights against religion and free speech.

The Wall Street Journal reports that the accusations are not about the media, but there are some fears.

Well, lets think about it for a moment. Are they concerned because for the last 2 years they have been taking stolen information, secret anonymous tips from supposed insiders, uncorroborated, and publishing them as factual information for the expressed purpose of bringing down the President of the United States. Maybe they have a point. Maybe their lack of accountability and lack of journalistic ethics are about to expose them to greater penalties than just being the laughing stock of the citizens of the country.

Just saying ....

The WikiLeaks rogue is indicted for conspiring to crack U.S. databases.

Julian Assange has done much harm to American interests over the last decade, and on Thursday the WikiLeaks founder moved a large step closer to accountability in a U.S. court. British authorities arrested him on a U.S. warrant after Ecuador finally waived diplomatic immunity after protecting him for seven years at its embassy in London. Shortly after the arrest, the U.S. Justice Department unsealed an indictment against Mr. Assange for his alleged role in “one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States.”

The single-count federal indictment charges that he conspired with then-Army intelligence analyst Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning to commit computer intrusion. The indictment says he offered to help Ms. Manning crack a password stored on Defense Department computers connected to a “U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications.” It’s notable, and welcome, that Mr. Assange isn’t being charged under the Espionage Act of 1917. Journalists including those at the Wall Street Journal sometimes feel the duty to disclose information in the public interest that governments would rather keep secret. Indicting Mr. Assange merely for releasing classified information could have set a precedent that prosecutors might have used in the future against journalists. If the charges are true, Mr. Assange wasn’t simply publishing documents that Ms. Manning sent his way. He is alleged to have actively collaborated to break into U.S. government computers—in a way that would make it harder to trace back to Ms. Manning. Mr. Assange’s lawyer says Mr. Assange was merely trying to protect the identity of his source, but helping a source illegally break into government databases isn’t legitimate journalism. It’s worth recalling that in early 2010 Ms. Manning downloaded four nearly complete U.S. government databases

More From The Wall Street Journal (subscription required):