The New York Times problem
==========================

The New York Times problem is the objection John Kiriakou says stopped the Obama administration from charging Julian Assange, and which he regards as unanswered by the administrations that followed.

The argument

"The Washington Post, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, AP, all of these big mainstream news outlets publish classified information literally every single day. Washington couldn't run if it didn't have classified leaks every single day. And usually it's the White House or the Pentagon that's doing the leaking."

From that the conclusion follows mechanically: "if you're going to charge Julian Assange, a publisher, with multiple counts of espionage, then you're going to have to charge the Washington Post, the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the LA Times, AP, and everybody else who publishes classified information every single day. Well, that's a First Amendment violation, isn't it?"

He puts the choice as binary: "we're either going to be transparent and supporters of freedom of speech and freedom of press, or we're not. Because you can't be both."

Who held it, and who abandoned it

Kiriakou is careful to give Obama the credit on this narrow point: "remember, Barack Obama, as bad as he was, especially for national security whistleblowers, never charged Julian Assange with a crime. It was Donald Trump that did it."

He also records that he was wrong about what would follow. Like many of his colleagues, he expected Joe Biden, who had been part of the Obama administration and knew what the phrase meant, to have to drop the charges. "No. He doubled down." His expectation at the time of speaking was extradition to the Eastern District of Virginia before the end of 2023, followed by "years" of pre-trial detention while the two sides argued over what could be admitted as evidence.

See also

- Julian Assange
- Espionage Act
- Authorized Leaks
- Eastern District of Virginia
