organization:us justice department

  • GETTING JULIAN #ASSANGE: THE UNTOLD STORY
    http://johnpilger.com/articles/getting-julian-assange-the-untold-story

    The First Amendment protects publishers, journalists and whistleblowers, whether it is the editor of the New York Times or the editor of WikiLeaks. The very notion of free speech is described as America’s “founding virtue” or, as Thomas Jefferson called it, “our currency”.

    Faced with this hurdle, the US Justice Department has contrived charges of “espionage”, “conspiracy to commit espionage”, “conversion” (theft of government property), “computer fraud and abuse” (computer hacking) and general “conspiracy”. The favoured Espionage Act, which was meant to deter pacifists and conscientious objectors during World War One, has provisions for life imprisonment and the death penalty.

    Assange’s ability to defend himself in such a #Kafkaesque world has been severely limited by the US declaring his case a state secret. In 2015, a federal court in Washington blocked the release of all information about the “national security” investigation against WikiLeaks, because it was “active and ongoing” and would harm the “pending prosecution” of Assange. The judge, Barbara J. Rothstein, said it was necessary to show “appropriate deference to the executive in matters of national security”. This is a kangaroo court.

    • Liberté d’expression Howard Zinn
      Le Premier Amendement en question

      https://agone.org/revueagone/agone31et32/enligne/0/index.html#debut-chapitre


      Tous ceux qui grandissent aux états-unis apprennent que ce pays a le bonheur infini de jouir de la liberté d’expression. Et nous devons cette chance au fait que notre Constitution contient une Déclaration des droits dont le premier amendement s’ouvre sur cette affirmation décisive : « Le Congrès ne fera aucune loi relativement à l’établissement d’une religion ou en interdisant le libre exercice ; ou restreignant la liberté de parole ou de la presse ; ou le droit du peuple de s’assembler paisiblement et d’adresser des pétitions au gouvernement pour une réparation de ses torts. »

      L’idée selon laquelle le Premier Amendement garantit effectivement notre liberté d’expression est un élément de l’idéologie de notre société. D’ailleurs la foi dans les serments écrits noir sur blanc et l’aveuglement à l’égard des réalités politiques et économiques semblent profondément ancrées dans cet ensemble de croyances propagé par les faiseurs d’opinion américains. La ferveur quasi religieuse qui s’exprima à l’occasion de l’année du bicentenaire de l’élaboration de la Constitution en a livré suffisamment de témoignages.

      Pourtant, comme je vais tenter de le montrer maintenant, penser que la seule existence du Premier Amendement garantit notre liberté d’expression est une profonde erreur. Une erreur qui peut, parfois, nous coûter non seulement la liberté mais également, dans certaines circonstances, la vie.

  • Authors weigh in on the Amazon-Hachette war - World Socialist Web Site

    http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/10/10/amaz-o10.html

    In the latest development in the long-running dispute between Amazon and publishing conglomerate Hachette, hundreds of authors, including such prominent figures as Philip Roth, Salman Rushdie and V.S. Naipaul, have added their voices to a call for an antitrust inquiry into the giant online retailer by the US Justice Department.

    Amazon, originating at the dawn of the Internet age as an online bookseller, now has a workforce of 132,000, warehouse centers in almost every corner of the globe and annual revenues fast approaching $100 billion. Its founder, Jeff Bezos, with a net wealth of about $28 billion, is currently ranked as the world’s 17th richest individual.

    #amazon #hachette #livre #corporation

  • Criminalité financière Finance Etats Unis Goldman Sachs

    US drops investigations of Goldman Sachs

    Les ETats-Unis abandonne les poursuites pénales contre Goldman Sachs

    http://www.wsws.org/articles/2012/aug2012/gold-a11.shtml

    By Barry Grey
    11 August 2012

    The US Justice Department announced Thursday evening it was ending a one-year criminal investigation and would not file charges against the giant Wall Street investment bank Goldman Sachs or any of its employees.

    In April 2011, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations released a voluminous report on the role of major banks, federal regulators and credit rating firms in the collapse of the subprime mortgage market and ensuing financial crash of September 2008.

  • How the US Justice Department legally hacked my Twitter account | Birgitta Jónsdóttir | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/nov/11/us-justice-department-legally-hacked-twitter

    Before my Twitter case, in which the US Department of Justice has demanded that the social media site hands over personal information about my account which it deems necessary to its investigation of WikiLeaks, I didn’t think much about what rights I would be signing off when accepting user agreement in my computer. The text is usually lengthy, in a legal language that most people don’t understand. Very few people read the user agreements, and very few understand their legal implications if someone in the real world would try to use one against them.

    http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/11/11-3

    A Virginia district court judge has ruled the U.S. government can collect the private information of three WikiLeaks volunteers from the social networking site, Twitter. The government has subpoenaed all the account information of Icelandic lawmaker Birgitta Jonsdottir, Dutch activist Rop Gongrjip and programmer Jacob Appelbaum. Thursday’s ruling upholds a lower court judgment in March that found the subpoena does not violate constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.