[wapoamspomw]

>except for the one password

If he did attempt to break the password hash, he conspired to hack military systems. I don't see why someone who attempted to break a password hash for access to classified documents shouldn't be prosecuted, journalist or not.

[megous]

Don't mil guys have DoD cards or some such? Why would hacking a password help anything? You still need to have a card for you account, no?

[SargeZT]

At least back then SIPRNet had a password login for normal users. I've been out for nearly a decade, so I don't know if the situation has changed.

[ryanlol]

Well, there are lots of jurisdictions in the world where it’s not a crime to conspire.

Presumably there are quite a few reasonable people who disagree on the necessity of prosecuting “crimes” like this. Why’s your way the right way?

[wapoamspomw]

What countries allow their journalists to attempt to hack the country's military without consequence?

[travisoneill1]

Well this one apparently allows it's soldiers given the pardon of the co-conspirator. And, yes I think it should be severely punished in either case, but seeing both go free is a lot less scary than seeing unequal justice handed down because one was a thorn in the governments side.

[belltaco]

It wasn't a pardon, it was a commuting of sentence. Huge difference.

[chachachoney]

The law doesn't necessarily agree, but that doesn't mean its analogous reasoning is just, or even technically correct.

Here's a better lens: Assange attempted to solve a math problem.

Solving a hash is not the same as breaking a physical lock, or attempting entry.