Tag Archives: Eugene Volokh

The Evil Empire strikes back: WikiLeaks' Internet connection severed; RT's bank accounts frozen

WikiLeaks has been releasing to the public successive batches of damaging emails of first, the Democratic National Committee; then, Hillary Clinton’s emails when she was secretary of state; and currently, the emails of John Podesta, the chair of Hillary’s presidential campaign.
To say that those revealing emails are embarrassing and damaging for the Democrats and Hillary in particular, is an understatement.
So Hillary and her minions are furiously trying to contain the damage.
The Evil Empire strikes back.

Strike One

On August 31, 2016, Hillary Clinton threatened Russia with war. Accusing Russia of “hacking into the Democratic National Committee and even some state election systems,” she said:

“So we’ve got to step up our game, make sure we are well defended and able to take the fight to those who go after us. As President, I will make it clear that United States will treat cyber attacks just like any other attack. We will be ready with serious political, economic, and military responses.

Strike TWO

On the morning of October 12, 2016, CNN’s Chris Cuomo threatened the American people that we shouldn’t read the leaked WikiLeaks emails because “it’s illegal to possess these stolen documents” — which is rich, coming from Cuomo who had openly admitted that the media are whole-hog for lawless Hillary, saying “We couldn’t help her any more than we have, she’s got just a free ride so far from the media, we’re the biggest ones promoting her campaign.”
Cuomo then said “It’s different for the media,” i.e., it’s okay for the media to “possess these stolen documents”. So, instead of reading the WikiLeaks emails for ourselves, we should just rely on him and other MSM journalists to tell us what those emails say, “so that everything you learn about this, you’re learning from us.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X16_KzX1vE
What Cuomo said is nothing less than unconstitutional.
Writing for The Washington Post, UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh cites the Supreme Court’s decision in 2001’s Bartnicki v. Vopper:

“The First Amendment offers the same protection to the media as to the rest of us, including when it comes to possessing or distributing illegally obtained material (so long as you weren’t involved in the original illegal hack or interception or leak)…. But in any event, remember that, whatever First Amendment rules may apply, the media has no more First Amendment rights than the rest of us.”

Strike THREE

Last night (Oct. 16), the Alternative Media was alit with rumor that WikiLeaks co-founder and editor-in-chief Julian Assange had died.
What triggered the rumor was WikiLeaks‘ activation of “dead man switch” — decryption keys (like passwords) for three sets of files: on John Kerry,  on Ecuador, and a third file on the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO).
WikiLeaks quickly put the rumor to rest with a tweet that they had activated the “dead man switch” contingency plan after Assange’s Internet service was intentionally cut off by a state actor — the government of Ecuador.
wikileaks-tweetwikileaks-tweet
RT reports this morning:

The internet is one of the few, if not only, available ways for Julian Assange, who has been locked up in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for more than four years [since 2012], to maintain contact with the outside world. […]
The unverified claims of state sabotage come as WikiLeaks continues to release damaging documents, most recently thousands of hacked emails from Hillary Clinton’s campaign manager John Podesta.
Earlier this month, Assange claimed his organization would aim to publish documents “every week” in the run up to US Election Day on November 8.
Clinton’s campaign has made unsubstantiated claims that WikiLeaks is working with the Russian government to help defeat the Democrat in favor of Trump.
Last week the FBI reissued a statement saying it was working to “determine the accuracy, nature and scope” of cyber intrusions, but did not name any suspected perpetrators.
The ninth release of Podesta emails occurred on Sunday, bringing the total number of leaked files to over 12,000.
Among the hundreds of emails released are discussions about Clinton’s appeal among black voters, her email apologies, and Chelsea Clinton being described by one of her father’s longtime aides as a ‘backstabber’.
The batch also comes amid revelations of Clinton’s cozy relationship with the mainstream media, and how they work closely to control the media landscape and set up stories that show her in a favorable light.
Earlier this month, it emerged that Hillary Clinton reportedly wanted to “drone” WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange when she was the US secretary of state.
According to True Pundit, Clinton and the State Department were under pressure to silence the whistleblower in the months before WikiLeaks dumped some 250,000 diplomatic cables from 1966 to 2010, dubbed CableGate.
Unidentified State Department sources claimed Clinton asked “can’t we just drone this guy?”.

Strike FOUR

RT, formerly known as Russia Today, broadcasts 24-hours a day in English, Arabic and Spanish, but is primarily aimed at audiences in Europe and the United States, providing news, information and analyses that the MSM will not report.
RT has a British outlet called RT UK that broadcasts from London.
Today, as reported by AFP, in a tweet, RT‘s editor-in-chief Margarita Simonyan said that all of RT’s bank accounts in Britain have been closed down. “They have closed our accounts in Britain. All the accounts.” She said the RT channel had received a ruling that “cannot be reviewed,” adding sarcastically, “Long live freedom of speech,” but gave no further details.
How any American can support and vote for Hillary Clinton is utterly beyond my comprehension.
See also:

H/t “Barry Soetoro” and GiGi
Help support freedom of the press. Donate to WikiLeaks! Click here.

UPDATE (Oct. 18, 2016):

In a tweet today, WikiLeaks identified the Obama administration as the “state actor” behind the cutting of Assange’s Internet connection. In the words of the tweet:

“Multiple U.S. sources tell us [U.S. Secretary of State] John Kerry asked Ecuador to stop Assange from publishing Clinton docs during FARC peace negotiations.”

“FARC peace negotiations” refers to negotiations between the Columbian government and the country’s largest Marxist rebel group — the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (in Spanish, Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia or FARC), a guerrilla movement in the continuing 5-decades long Colombian armed conflict since 1964.
~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0
 

Tennessee Law Nullifies First Amendment Right of Free Speech

More creeping Big-Brother state.

The state of Tennessee just passed a law that criminalizes free speech if an image posted online causes “emotional distress” to someone.

Randy of Patriot Action Network alerts us to a new law in Tennessee which makes it a crime to “transmit or display an image” online that is likely to “frighten, intimidate or cause emotional distress” to someone who sees it.

Violations can get you almost a year in jail time or up to $2500 in fines.

Shame on you, Bill Haslam

The ban on distressing images, which was sponsored by Democrat Rep. Charles Curtis and signed by Republican Gov. William Edward “Bill” Haslam last week, is an update to an existing law that already makes it a crime to make phone calls, send emails, or otherwise communicate directly with someone in a manner the sender “reasonably should know” would “cause emotional distress” to the recipient. If the communication lacks a “legitimate purpose,” the sender faces jail time.

The new legislation adds images to the list of communications that can trigger criminal liability. But the “emotionally distressed” individual needs not be even be the intended recipient. Anyone who sees the image is a potential victim. If a court decides you “should have known” that an image you posted would be upsetting to someone who sees it, you can face months in prison and thousands of dollars in fines.

If you think the law sounds unconstitutional, you’re right. The Tennessee law is a gross violation of our First Amendment free speech right.

In a blog post, constitutional scholar Eugene Volokh points out just how broad the Tennessee legislation is. The law doesn’t require that the picture be of the “victim,” nor would the government need to prove that you intended the image to be distressing. Volokh points out that a wide variety of images, “pictures of Mohamed, or blasphemous jokes about Jesus Christ, or harsh cartoon insults of some political group,” could “cause emotional distress to a similarly situated person of reasonable sensibilities,” triggering liability. He calls the bill “pretty clearly unconstitutional.”

This legislation must be overturned and fast.

Can you just see Muslim Brotherhood groups like CAIR, ISNA, and ICNA using this unConstitutional law to silence, intimidate, and punish critics of jihadists?

[Original source: https://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/06/new-tenness…]

~Eowyn

Please follow and like us:
0