1
00:00:00,400 --> 00:00:04,280
Speaker 1: So yesterday David Letterman was arrested in the Ecuadorian embassy

2
00:00:04,320 --> 00:00:06,520
Speaker 1: in London and dragged out to his car. Why was

3
00:00:06,600 --> 00:00:09,880
Speaker 1: David Letterman arrested? That was actually Julian A Sanshack, co

4
00:00:10,119 --> 00:00:15,280
Speaker 1: founder of Wiki leaks. After many years there hold up

5
00:00:15,280 --> 00:00:19,560
Speaker 1: in the embassy, finally something happened. Why it happened, and

6
00:00:19,560 --> 00:00:22,640
Speaker 1: and and how it happened is a really interesting story

7
00:00:22,680 --> 00:00:25,800
Speaker 1: in which the usual partisan lines are are more or

8
00:00:25,880 --> 00:00:29,360
Speaker 1: less useless. I think which refreshing. I saw a lot

9
00:00:29,400 --> 00:00:33,000
Speaker 1: of Democrats and Republicans wanting Julian Assange too, Rod and Jail.

10
00:00:33,360 --> 00:00:35,960
Speaker 1: I get a little concerned when Republicans and Democrats agree

11
00:00:35,960 --> 00:00:39,440
Speaker 1: on something. Sometimes sometimes that means this clearly obviously is

12
00:00:39,440 --> 00:00:41,479
Speaker 1: a good thing. Sometimes it means it's clearly obviously a

13
00:00:41,520 --> 00:00:44,000
Speaker 1: bad thing. Well. Matt zapp Potowski is part of a

14
00:00:44,080 --> 00:00:47,240
Speaker 1: team that has written a really terrific and interesting piece

15
00:00:47,240 --> 00:00:51,159
Speaker 1: in the Washington Post this morning, the title of which is,

16
00:00:51,320 --> 00:00:54,520
Speaker 1: after years of debate, Trump administration chose to pursue criminal

17
00:00:54,600 --> 00:00:57,960
Speaker 1: case against as sage, Matt za Potowski joins us. Now, Hello, Matt,

18
00:00:57,960 --> 00:01:00,400
Speaker 1: how are you sir? Hey? I'm doing great for having

19
00:01:00,440 --> 00:01:03,800
Speaker 1: me on. Yeah, it's our pleasure. So really thought provoking

20
00:01:03,840 --> 00:01:06,240
Speaker 1: stuff here about the press and the First Amendment and

21
00:01:06,360 --> 00:01:10,240
Speaker 1: visit a criminal conspiracy with what are the two sides,

22
00:01:10,319 --> 00:01:13,520
Speaker 1: if indeed there are just two to the question. Well,

23
00:01:13,560 --> 00:01:17,360
Speaker 1: this is a really interesting debate. Julian Assange, of course,

24
00:01:17,760 --> 00:01:21,640
Speaker 1: at some base level, is a publisher. He publishes information,

25
00:01:21,680 --> 00:01:24,959
Speaker 1: and he's drawn the ire of governments because he publishes

26
00:01:25,000 --> 00:01:28,679
Speaker 1: a lot of classified information. So for years, pretty much

27
00:01:28,680 --> 00:01:32,360
Speaker 1: starting in after he dumps these State Department cables and

28
00:01:32,400 --> 00:01:36,039
Speaker 1: Iraq and Afghanistan war documents onto the Internet, there's this

29
00:01:36,160 --> 00:01:40,280
Speaker 1: great debate inside the Justice Department. Can we charge this

30
00:01:40,360 --> 00:01:43,600
Speaker 1: guy with a crime? The sort of hardest edged people

31
00:01:43,640 --> 00:01:47,400
Speaker 1: would say, well, sure we can. Publishing classified information itself

32
00:01:47,440 --> 00:01:50,240
Speaker 1: could be considered a crime. But then other people would

33
00:01:50,240 --> 00:01:53,120
Speaker 1: say no, no, no, that would make him just the

34
00:01:53,160 --> 00:01:55,440
Speaker 1: same as the New York Times or the Washington Post.

35
00:01:55,520 --> 00:01:59,440
Speaker 1: Their reporters published classified information all the time. So at

36
00:01:59,440 --> 00:02:02,160
Speaker 1: the end of the Obama administration, they're kind of been

37
00:02:02,160 --> 00:02:06,400
Speaker 1: a holding pattern. His cases technically open, but they've decided

38
00:02:06,440 --> 00:02:08,840
Speaker 1: they're not going to charge him because of the precedent.

39
00:02:08,880 --> 00:02:12,880
Speaker 1: This would set for the media potential First Amendment challenges

40
00:02:12,960 --> 00:02:15,560
Speaker 1: to the case. Jeff Sessions comes in as Attorney General,

41
00:02:15,680 --> 00:02:19,120
Speaker 1: really wants to crack down on unauthorized disclosures of information,

42
00:02:19,440 --> 00:02:21,320
Speaker 1: kind of dusts off this old case and we're off

43
00:02:21,360 --> 00:02:24,760
Speaker 1: to the races. And the climate by then two has changed.

44
00:02:24,800 --> 00:02:28,359
Speaker 1: His organization has leaked a lot more stuff, most notably

45
00:02:28,440 --> 00:02:32,360
Speaker 1: c i A, hacking tools, democrats emails. The climate is

46
00:02:32,440 --> 00:02:34,760
Speaker 1: just different. And and that's sort of how they come

47
00:02:34,760 --> 00:02:37,919
Speaker 1: to this decision that yeah, they're going to charge him. Um,

48
00:02:37,960 --> 00:02:41,079
Speaker 1: And you know, the debate will rage about the First Amendment.

49
00:02:41,240 --> 00:02:42,840
Speaker 1: Do you know in what way this is the same

50
00:02:43,040 --> 00:02:45,600
Speaker 1: or different than the famous Pentagon Papers case that the

51
00:02:45,639 --> 00:02:49,080
Speaker 1: Supreme Court ruled on in which Daniel Ellsberg got a

52
00:02:49,080 --> 00:02:53,119
Speaker 1: hold of documents that you know, said some important things

53
00:02:53,120 --> 00:02:56,280
Speaker 1: about the Vietnam War and then they were printed. So

54
00:02:56,400 --> 00:02:59,720
Speaker 1: the way prosecutors view this case as different. You can

55
00:02:59,720 --> 00:03:02,840
Speaker 1: see this in the charge is that Julian, Well, this

56
00:03:03,000 --> 00:03:05,760
Speaker 1: is different from from Elsberger a person like that, because

57
00:03:05,800 --> 00:03:08,680
Speaker 1: Julian Assange is the recipient of information. He's not a

58
00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:11,880
Speaker 1: guy who signed papers that said I won't reveal this

59
00:03:11,960 --> 00:03:14,880
Speaker 1: classified information which the government has given me access to.

60
00:03:14,960 --> 00:03:18,080
Speaker 1: In this case, that would be Chelsea Manning, who was charged,

61
00:03:18,240 --> 00:03:21,079
Speaker 1: went to jail for a while until our sentence was commuted.

62
00:03:21,240 --> 00:03:24,240
Speaker 1: Joan Assange is a little different. He's the publisher, so

63
00:03:24,280 --> 00:03:27,120
Speaker 1: it's comparing it to the Pentagon paper story. A songe

64
00:03:27,160 --> 00:03:30,600
Speaker 1: is the New York Times, not Daniel Ellsberg, correct, But

65
00:03:30,760 --> 00:03:33,520
Speaker 1: prosecutors see him as a little different because he's not

66
00:03:33,639 --> 00:03:36,880
Speaker 1: just the recipient and publisher of information. The way they

67
00:03:36,920 --> 00:03:41,119
Speaker 1: see it, he kind of conspired with Manning to get

68
00:03:41,160 --> 00:03:45,720
Speaker 1: the information, and in particular, they discussed possibly cracking this

69
00:03:45,960 --> 00:03:50,160
Speaker 1: password so they would sort of have administrative privileges inside

70
00:03:50,240 --> 00:03:53,800
Speaker 1: the government system. They didn't. They were ultimately successful in that,

71
00:03:53,880 --> 00:03:56,560
Speaker 1: and a lot of what Manning leaked he had access to.

72
00:03:56,640 --> 00:03:59,080
Speaker 1: They didn't need to crack any password. But what he

73
00:03:59,200 --> 00:04:02,280
Speaker 1: was charged with, it's just this hacking conspiracy trying to

74
00:04:02,440 --> 00:04:05,240
Speaker 1: crack this password, and that's where they say, that's where

75
00:04:05,240 --> 00:04:07,920
Speaker 1: the justice pharmacisum is different from a journalist. A journalist

76
00:04:07,960 --> 00:04:10,520
Speaker 1: generally isn't going to break into a government office and

77
00:04:10,560 --> 00:04:12,880
Speaker 1: get information that's clearly a crime. They're gonna try to

78
00:04:12,960 --> 00:04:16,680
Speaker 1: coax people who actually legitimately have information to give it

79
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:19,520
Speaker 1: to them, and that person, the person giving the information

80
00:04:19,920 --> 00:04:22,479
Speaker 1: might be charged for the crime, but the journalists, generally

81
00:04:22,520 --> 00:04:24,920
Speaker 1: in justice parmament practice would not. And this is where

82
00:04:24,920 --> 00:04:27,880
Speaker 1: it gets so interesting. I saw Glenn Greenwald tweeted earlier

83
00:04:27,920 --> 00:04:30,760
Speaker 1: this morning that the New York Times installed. Is that

84
00:04:30,839 --> 00:04:34,400
Speaker 1: what call some some sort of phone line is something

85
00:04:34,400 --> 00:04:38,120
Speaker 1: that obviously made it easier for people to leak information

86
00:04:38,200 --> 00:04:41,680
Speaker 1: without getting caught. I don't remember the precise parameter of it,

87
00:04:41,720 --> 00:04:47,400
Speaker 1: but Glenn asked, is that conspiracy to um, you know,

88
00:04:47,520 --> 00:04:51,839
Speaker 1: disseminate classified material? Are they actively now aiding and abetting

89
00:04:52,400 --> 00:04:55,320
Speaker 1: the sharing of classified material making them liable in the

90
00:04:55,320 --> 00:04:58,520
Speaker 1: same way that Julian Osane is uh drawn? That line

91
00:04:58,600 --> 00:05:01,960
Speaker 1: is going to be a little tough. I think, yeah,

92
00:05:02,040 --> 00:05:04,680
Speaker 1: there's so much gray area here. We at the Post

93
00:05:04,720 --> 00:05:07,240
Speaker 1: have a similar thing called secure drop, where people can

94
00:05:07,279 --> 00:05:10,960
Speaker 1: communicate with us anonymously over encrypted apps. They can share

95
00:05:11,000 --> 00:05:18,000
Speaker 1: tips that well, you are, I think prosecutors would say

96
00:05:18,000 --> 00:05:20,920
Speaker 1: Assange is a little different because he's sort of reaching

97
00:05:20,920 --> 00:05:24,039
Speaker 1: out to Manning and they're trying together to hack a

98
00:05:24,080 --> 00:05:28,160
Speaker 1: government system that you know, there are interesting gray areas here,

99
00:05:28,160 --> 00:05:30,320
Speaker 1: though in the indictment also cites things that are just

100
00:05:30,400 --> 00:05:34,440
Speaker 1: sort of common reporting practice, use of encrypted apps encouraging

101
00:05:34,520 --> 00:05:37,760
Speaker 1: sources to kind of cover their tracks. That is common

102
00:05:38,120 --> 00:05:42,440
Speaker 1: reporting practice. And Glenn, who I really respect, is saying, look,

103
00:05:42,520 --> 00:05:44,760
Speaker 1: even the hacking was kind of a cover up. The

104
00:05:44,760 --> 00:05:47,680
Speaker 1: the hacking wasn't meant to get him more materials. It

105
00:05:47,839 --> 00:05:50,560
Speaker 1: was meant to cover up the fact that materials already

106
00:05:50,640 --> 00:05:54,880
Speaker 1: had been leaked. So is that so far from using signal?

107
00:05:55,120 --> 00:05:58,120
Speaker 1: I mean, there is really interesting an interesting First Amendment

108
00:05:58,320 --> 00:06:01,880
Speaker 1: question here. Prosecutors sought to narrow that by only charging

109
00:06:01,920 --> 00:06:04,520
Speaker 1: him with sort of one hacking offense, not SPN and

110
00:06:04,520 --> 00:06:07,240
Speaker 1: what yeah, what how big an offense is hacking? Anyway?

111
00:06:07,279 --> 00:06:11,440
Speaker 1: It's it's not not that big. But he faces so

112
00:06:11,520 --> 00:06:14,920
Speaker 1: far as a five year statutory maximum penalty, and it's

113
00:06:14,960 --> 00:06:17,400
Speaker 1: it's funny in the federal system, nobody really gets the

114
00:06:17,560 --> 00:06:21,440
Speaker 1: statutory so think so on what he's been charged with

115
00:06:21,520 --> 00:06:23,360
Speaker 1: it he's facing a couple of years in jail if

116
00:06:23,360 --> 00:06:26,000
Speaker 1: he's found guilty. So I don't understand why he couldn't claim, look,

117
00:06:26,000 --> 00:06:29,040
Speaker 1: we got the information from Bradley and the thumb drive

118
00:06:29,080 --> 00:06:31,279
Speaker 1: and all that, I didn't get it from the hacking.

119
00:06:31,279 --> 00:06:34,080
Speaker 1: And I don't know how you'd argue with that. Yeah,

120
00:06:34,200 --> 00:06:37,279
Speaker 1: I mean the trick here is it's not like hacking

121
00:06:37,400 --> 00:06:39,920
Speaker 1: has to be successful to be a crime, and it's

122
00:06:39,960 --> 00:06:43,359
Speaker 1: not like hacking has to get classified information to be

123
00:06:43,400 --> 00:06:46,120
Speaker 1: a crime. If somebody hacked the Washington Post, for example,

124
00:06:46,200 --> 00:06:48,600
Speaker 1: or sought to hack the Washington Post, we don't have

125
00:06:48,640 --> 00:06:52,160
Speaker 1: classified information that it could be across. Just to clear

126
00:06:52,320 --> 00:06:55,360
Speaker 1: my confusion, as I saw Republicans and Democrats talking about

127
00:06:55,360 --> 00:06:57,960
Speaker 1: how Assange needs to rot in jail, that doesn't seem

128
00:06:58,000 --> 00:07:01,080
Speaker 1: like that's even on the table right now. No. Now,

129
00:07:01,080 --> 00:07:04,320
Speaker 1: it is possible that they will upgrade the charges until

130
00:07:04,360 --> 00:07:06,760
Speaker 1: he's sort of formally turned over to US custody, which

131
00:07:06,800 --> 00:07:09,560
Speaker 1: is the process that could take years. They could upgrade

132
00:07:09,600 --> 00:07:12,200
Speaker 1: the charges, but for some people this is kind of uh,

133
00:07:12,600 --> 00:07:14,920
Speaker 1: I don't know if you would say disappointing, but kind

134
00:07:14,920 --> 00:07:18,000
Speaker 1: of anticlimactic. Again, it's not like he's charged as a

135
00:07:18,040 --> 00:07:20,320
Speaker 1: spy or as an agent of a foreign government. And

136
00:07:20,520 --> 00:07:22,480
Speaker 1: if he cleaned up after there's cat, he might still

137
00:07:22,480 --> 00:07:28,120
Speaker 1: be in the embassy, right Mad Zapatosky, The Washington Post

138
00:07:28,160 --> 00:07:34,560
Speaker 1: is onlinement covers national security, among other things. Uh so, well, yeah,

139
00:07:34,600 --> 00:07:36,080
Speaker 1: you know, I was going to make the joke that

140
00:07:36,120 --> 00:07:39,920
Speaker 1: the various actresses who bribed their kids away into Yale.

141
00:07:40,080 --> 00:07:41,920
Speaker 1: Are you gonna get five times as much time as

142
00:07:41,960 --> 00:07:43,720
Speaker 1: Julian Osan? So it's a little odd we're paying this

143
00:07:43,800 --> 00:07:46,640
Speaker 1: much attention to it. But there he's gonna spend that

144
00:07:48,120 --> 00:07:51,520
Speaker 1: in jail clearly and should um and yes, I'm pretty judging,

145
00:07:52,320 --> 00:07:56,040
Speaker 1: But well, I just how likely is the addition of,

146
00:07:56,800 --> 00:08:02,400
Speaker 1: for instance, an espionage charge Matt that. It's just so

147
00:08:02,520 --> 00:08:05,000
Speaker 1: hard to say. I mean, on one hand, a lot

148
00:08:05,040 --> 00:08:07,640
Speaker 1: of people would want that, and this is so surprising

149
00:08:07,680 --> 00:08:10,520
Speaker 1: that he charged with one hacking offense to five year penalty.

150
00:08:10,560 --> 00:08:12,720
Speaker 1: But on the other hand, when you start to bring

151
00:08:12,720 --> 00:08:15,640
Speaker 1: an espionage you're really going to start raising these First

152
00:08:15,680 --> 00:08:19,280
Speaker 1: Amendment concerns. And there's also a concern about his extradition.

153
00:08:19,360 --> 00:08:24,000
Speaker 1: This is a very involved, intricate process, and if the

154
00:08:24,160 --> 00:08:27,160
Speaker 1: UK decides we've charged him with a political crime, they

155
00:08:27,160 --> 00:08:30,200
Speaker 1: will not send him over here. Espionage kind of has

156
00:08:30,280 --> 00:08:33,000
Speaker 1: a political context. So do you slap on those charges

157
00:08:33,000 --> 00:08:35,360
Speaker 1: and risk never getting him back? Do you just sit

158
00:08:35,440 --> 00:08:38,840
Speaker 1: on the hacking charges, maybe at a few more hacking charges. Uh?

159
00:08:38,880 --> 00:08:41,239
Speaker 1: You know, this is gonna be a tough call for prosecutors,

160
00:08:41,440 --> 00:08:43,760
Speaker 1: and the United States couldn't say no, no, no no, that's

161
00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:45,480
Speaker 1: just a hack in case. Then get him here and

162
00:08:45,559 --> 00:08:48,600
Speaker 1: charge him with everything, including treason. Put him out, go

163
00:08:48,679 --> 00:08:52,000
Speaker 1: up against the wall because the Brits would go nuts. Yeah,

164
00:08:52,040 --> 00:08:56,600
Speaker 1: that would right thereship. Yeah, that's right, they couldn't do that. Wow. Wow,

165
00:08:57,000 --> 00:08:59,520
Speaker 1: this is so thought provoking. That's kind of why it's fun.

166
00:08:59,559 --> 00:09:03,000
Speaker 1: Matt zap Potoski, national security reporter covering the Just Department

167
00:09:03,040 --> 00:09:05,920
Speaker 1: for the Washington Post. Matt always stimulating. Thanks a Milian,

168
00:09:05,960 --> 00:09:11,040
Speaker 1: We appreciate your time. He's gonna end up spending, if

169
00:09:11,080 --> 00:09:14,080
Speaker 1: any time in jail, a very small amount in a

170
00:09:14,200 --> 00:09:19,760
Speaker 1: not very scary jail conspiracy to hack. Right, he'll spend

171
00:09:19,760 --> 00:09:22,280
Speaker 1: two years in a medium security jail, and you know,

172
00:09:22,400 --> 00:09:24,640
Speaker 1: given a fact that you know, he won't have his

173
00:09:24,679 --> 00:09:27,080
Speaker 1: cat with him. But he's been in a kind of

174
00:09:27,120 --> 00:09:31,840
Speaker 1: a glorified apartment. Nobody speaks anything but Ecuadorian. There's cat

175
00:09:31,920 --> 00:09:37,440
Speaker 1: crap everywhere. He could argue time served, right, time served. Yeah,

176
00:09:37,480 --> 00:09:39,480
Speaker 1: I mean, I'm trying to be fair about this, and uh,

177
00:09:39,640 --> 00:09:42,199
Speaker 1: you know, we're both free speech guys. You don't want

178
00:09:42,240 --> 00:09:45,880
Speaker 1: anything that could, in the future make it more difficult

179
00:09:46,000 --> 00:09:48,760
Speaker 1: for the truth to come out. I think Julian Ossange

180
00:09:48,800 --> 00:09:51,520
Speaker 1: is a thoroughly bad human being. I think he's an

181
00:09:51,520 --> 00:09:54,560
Speaker 1: awful human being. He hates America, so I think that's

182
00:09:54,600 --> 00:09:58,640
Speaker 1: pretty clear. Yeah, he's an America hater. He is more

183
00:09:58,679 --> 00:10:03,400
Speaker 1: than willing to endanger innocent people or to spill national

184
00:10:03,480 --> 00:10:08,360
Speaker 1: secrets that there's no justification for because he I think

185
00:10:08,360 --> 00:10:13,360
Speaker 1: he's got I think he's a megalomaniac. I think he's

186
00:10:13,400 --> 00:10:16,880
Speaker 1: convinced that he's one of the great people in history. Um,

187
00:10:16,960 --> 00:10:18,760
Speaker 1: you know, I think some of the stuff he's leaked

188
00:10:18,760 --> 00:10:21,440
Speaker 1: has been fine. I think it probably should have been leaked. Um,

189
00:10:21,600 --> 00:10:24,200
Speaker 1: some of the stuff was was terrible. There's no justifying it.

190
00:10:24,600 --> 00:10:26,319
Speaker 1: So I don't like the guy at all. I think

191
00:10:26,320 --> 00:10:31,120
Speaker 1: he's slimy. On the other hand, I get the First

192
00:10:31,160 --> 00:10:34,360
Speaker 1: Amendment argument and and and I think the government needs

193
00:10:34,360 --> 00:10:37,640
Speaker 1: to tread carefully, But they are treading carefully. I think

194
00:10:37,679 --> 00:10:42,200
Speaker 1: we may have lines drawn or at least kind of

195
00:10:43,120 --> 00:10:46,439
Speaker 1: better shading on some of this activity as a result

196
00:10:46,480 --> 00:10:49,200
Speaker 1: of this case, as we work through it as a people,

197
00:10:49,400 --> 00:10:50,800
Speaker 1: which I think is probably a good thing. I think

198
00:10:50,840 --> 00:10:53,960
Speaker 1: you'll end up in the United States. Yeah, I would guess. So,

199
00:10:54,360 --> 00:10:57,440
Speaker 1: I would guess spending heard some man was saying they

200
00:10:57,720 --> 00:11:01,040
Speaker 1: don't really want him in the United States A real yeah,

201
00:11:01,080 --> 00:11:03,800
Speaker 1: I don't know who. That's interesting? Was that TV lawyers,

202
00:11:04,679 --> 00:11:08,599
Speaker 1: I wonder? Yeah, yeah, well it does open up a

203
00:11:08,600 --> 00:11:15,439
Speaker 1: whole series of problems, Justice Department problems, pr problems. UM.

204
00:11:15,600 --> 00:11:18,280
Speaker 1: Might be easier just let him languish in embassy somewhere

205
00:11:18,559 --> 00:11:20,800
Speaker 1: surrounded by his cat's poo. Could shine a light on

206
00:11:20,920 --> 00:11:24,800
Speaker 1: some information that people have forgotten that came out of it. Yes,

207
00:11:25,559 --> 00:11:29,079
Speaker 1: right now. Because I'm also a bad person, I've been

208
00:11:29,200 --> 00:11:31,520
Speaker 1: very excited about the idea that he's got his poison

209
00:11:31,600 --> 00:11:35,880
Speaker 1: pills somewhere ready to get de encrypted and uh and

210
00:11:35,920 --> 00:11:38,880
Speaker 1: disseminated secrets about the rich and the powerful all over

211
00:11:38,920 --> 00:11:43,240
Speaker 1: the world, um, which he claims. Yeah, yeah, bring it on, Julian,

212
00:11:43,320 --> 00:11:47,400
Speaker 1: now's the time get that dang old beard trimmed and

213
00:11:47,400 --> 00:11:51,280
Speaker 1: and turn loose to gossip man cat scratch fever. I see,

214
00:11:52,160 --> 00:11:55,560
Speaker 1: all right, very nice, ted nugent classic and going with

215
00:11:55,600 --> 00:11:59,559
Speaker 1: the cat theme of the previous conversation. Why not. I

216
00:11:59,600 --> 00:12:03,800
Speaker 1: would to know what percentage of him getting this whole story,

217
00:12:04,200 --> 00:12:06,480
Speaker 1: him getting booted out of the embassy and starting this

218
00:12:06,520 --> 00:12:08,800
Speaker 1: whole story is because he wouldn't clean up after his cap.

219
00:12:09,440 --> 00:12:11,280
Speaker 1: If he had cleaned up after his cat, would he's

220
00:12:11,280 --> 00:12:13,560
Speaker 1: still be there and he wasn't paying his bills? Would

221
00:12:13,559 --> 00:12:14,960
Speaker 1: he been able to live out the rest of his

222
00:12:15,000 --> 00:12:17,439
Speaker 1: life there if he had just cleaned up after his cap.

223
00:12:17,600 --> 00:12:20,240
Speaker 1: From the Ecuadorian's point of view, this wasn't a delicate

224
00:12:20,280 --> 00:12:24,880
Speaker 1: and complex First Amendment case. This was a crappy roommate right,