The narrative is that Wikileaks acted as a co-conspirator in the theft of classified information.
It is legal in the US to republish illegally obtained information, so long as the publisher was not party to the crime in any way. The quoted snippet undermines claims that Julian Assanage was party to the crime.
Who has made such claims? Lamo. His claims and evidence form the motivation and basis of the Justice Department's investigation. According to Assange's lawyers, a grand jury was convened. If true, it clearly would benefit the prosecution to only enter as evidence the portions of the chat logs that best supported its case. If Wired published the entire logs, this wouldn't be possible.
I would take the release of the logs as indication that the justice department has abandoned that portion of the investigation, possibly after being denied by the grand jury.
Where in Wired.com's reporting is there any narrative that Assange directed Manning?
Your statement in the logs would somehow save Assange from a U.S. grand jury is laughable. And it's a very thin thread to try to weave a tapestry that Wired is in cahoots with the FBI. You must not read Threat Level very often.
There isn't in Wired, but there is in Lamo's statements.
They wouldn't save him, but they would significantly weaken the case. Other than Lamo's word, the only evidence is those logs and several encrypted emails.
I don't think Wired is in "cahoots" with the FBI (It's a justice department investigation also, not FBI). I do think one particular person at Wired (Poulson) is likely acting in a way that supports Lamo. Why Lamo wants all this, I don't know or care to speculate on.
Generally it's done in public, so this would be some sort of atypical procedure I'm not familiar with. And again, this is just based on statements by Assanages attorneys, which may not be trustworthy or accurately informed.
It is legal in the US to republish illegally obtained information, so long as the publisher was not party to the crime in any way. The quoted snippet undermines claims that Julian Assanage was party to the crime.
Who has made such claims? Lamo. His claims and evidence form the motivation and basis of the Justice Department's investigation. According to Assange's lawyers, a grand jury was convened. If true, it clearly would benefit the prosecution to only enter as evidence the portions of the chat logs that best supported its case. If Wired published the entire logs, this wouldn't be possible.
I would take the release of the logs as indication that the justice department has abandoned that portion of the investigation, possibly after being denied by the grand jury.