288 online
 
Most Popular Choices
Share on Facebook 111 Printer Friendly Page More Sharing Summarizing
OpEdNews Op Eds    H3'ed 2/27/20

Punishing the Free Speech of Julian Assange

By       (Page 2 of 2 pages) Become a premium member to see this article and all articles as one long page.   No comments

Andrew Napolitano
Message Andrew Napolitano
Become a Fan
  (1 fan)

Just as in the Pentagon Papers revelations, neither the Obama nor the Trump administration has questioned the truthfulness of the WikiLeaks publication even though they revealed murderous wrongdoing, duplicity at the highest levels of government and the names of American intelligence sources (which some mainstream publications declined to make known).

Assange fears that he cannot get a fair trial in the United States. The government says he can and will. When the government suddenly became interested in fair trials remains a mystery. Yet, arguments about fairness miss the point of this lawless prosecution. A journalist is a gatherer and disseminator of facts and opinions. The government's argument that because he communicated with Manning and helped Manning get the data into WikiLeaks' hands, Assange somehow crossed the line from protected behavior to criminal activity shows a pitiful antipathy to personal freedom.

Democracy dies in darkness. The press is the eyes and ears of an informed public. And those eyes and ears need a nose, so to speak. They need breathing room. It is the height of naivete to think that Ellsberg just dropped off the Pentagon Papers at the Times and the Post, without some coordination with those publications coordination that the courts assume exist and implicitly protect.

Might all of this be part of the Trump administration's efforts to chill the free speech of its press critics to deny them breathing room? After all, it has referred to them as "sick," "dishonest," "crazed," "unpatriotic," "unhinged" and "totally corrupt purveyors of fake news."

Yet the whole purpose of the First Amendment is to assure open, wide, robust debate about the government, free from government interference and threats. How can that debate take place in darkness and ignorance?

If "no law" doesn't really mean no law, we are deluding ourselves, and freedom is not reality. It is merely a wished for fantasy.

Next Page  1  |  2

(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).

Must Read 1   Well Said 1   Valuable 1  
Rate It | View Ratings

Andrew Napolitano Social Media Pages: Facebook page url on login Profile not filled in       Twitter page url on login Profile not filled in       Linkedin page url on login Profile not filled in       Instagram page url on login Profile not filled in

Judge Andrew P. Napolitano is a graduate of Princeton University and the University of Notre Dame Law School. He is the youngest life-tenured Superior Court judge in the history of the State of New Jersey.  He sat on the bench from 1987 to (more...)
 
Go To Commenting
The views expressed herein are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
Writers Guidelines

 
Contact AuthorContact Author Contact EditorContact Editor Author PageView Authors' Articles
Support OpEdNews

OpEdNews depends upon can't survive without your help.

If you value this article and the work of OpEdNews, please either Donate or Purchase a premium membership.

STAY IN THE KNOW
If you've enjoyed this, sign up for our daily or weekly newsletter to get lots of great progressive content.
Daily Weekly     OpEd News Newsletter

Name
Email
   (Opens new browser window)
 

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

Edward Snowden - An American in Moscow

Beware of Dangers of An Imperial Presidency

Punishing the Free Speech of Julian Assange

A Nation of Sheep

Freedom in a Time of Madness

Bush, Guantanamo, and the Rule of Law

To View Comments or Join the Conversation:

Tell A Friend