• Report shows CIA had made plans that included options to kill Assange in the embassy in London


    In 2017 the CIA under Pompeo (although the report showed the plans predated Pompeo although he pushed it forward) and the Trump Admin did some work making possible plans to kidnap and possibly kill Assange.

    The following statement can be attributed to Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF) executive director Trevor Timm:

    “The CIA is a disgrace. The fact that it contemplated and engaged in so many illegal acts against WikiLeaks, its associates, and even other award-winning journalists is an outright scandal that should be investigated by Congress and the Justice Department. The Biden Administration must drop its charges against Assange immediately. The case already threatens the rights of countless reporters. These new revelations, which involve a shocking disregard of the law, are truly beyond the pale.”

    Trump, as everyone knows, called Assange a hero when he was running for pres, and people looked for him to pardon Assange before he left the White House, but he didn't, although he pardoned other people.

    The US has been trying to have Assange extradited from England to the US for trial, and now people are asking if a nation can legally extradite someone if they had made plans to possibly kill them. Experts say the UK could continue without paying attention to this all, because it's considering on very narrow grands the legitimacy of the US's appeal merits.

    According to YahooNews, the some Obama officials looking at reclassifying Assange and related journalists Glen Greenwald and Laura Poitras (who were working on the Snowden documents at the time), as 'information brokers,' which would allow the government to get around a lot of legal guidelines they're expected to follow which prevented them from mounting various types of offensives against the journalists.

    A random commenter on this story wrote, "CIA wanted to assassinate a journalist? They're no better than the Saudi's with Jamal Khashoggi if that's the case. DISGUSTING!"

    Michael Isikoff, Chief Investigative Correspondent at YahooNews

    #YahooNews #Assange #US #FPF
     
  • Dan Ellsberg interviewed by Tutsi Gabbard (US Rep Hawaii)

    (In 2019 or 2020)

    "I was the first person charged under the charges he [Assange I think he's talking about] is now facing. But I was charged as a source, and there wasn't one for 10 years after that. ... and then 3 and 9 and 1 other. There were 3 cases and then 9 under Obama. They were all either plea bargains or won in court. It's never gone to the Supreme Court.

    "Mainly they were sources like me, and they were using the Espionage Act, which was designed for spies, and has no provision in it for pleading any public interest. You can't argue in court. I wasn't allowed to speak in court to answer the question--I spoke for four and a half days--but I wasn't allowed to answer the question, 'Why did you copy the Pentagon Papers?'

    "So my lawyer, a consitution lawyer, said, 'Your honor, I've never heard of a case where the defendant was not allowed to tell the jury why he did what he did,' and Judge Burns said, 'Well, you're hearing one now,' and that's been true of every case since then..

    "So you can't get a fair trial as a whistleblower. ... you can't say anything about what the impact has been, whether there was harm, what you wanted to accomplish.

    "But it was never meant to be an official secrets act, a British type official secret s act. ... and in fact they said at the time, in 1917 when they passed this, we don't want an official secret act. The question was could you use it against a source like me. Well, that never had been done since 1917. So it was an experiment with me.

    ... But the new thing about this [Assange] is that it's the first time a journalist has been tried as a defendent, and that makes it into a full British official secrets act.

    "So it's not even just that he can't argue motives effectively, as a journalist he should not be ... it's always been clear to papers that sources, like me, should not be tried under the Espionage Act where they can't plead public interest at all. But the newspapers never got behind us very much.
     
  • In 2021 people's impression of Assange

    Top YouTube questions:


    #Assange 
  • Assange case: Bit of progress for US gov side

    Many are heartbroken.

    Last January a London court (Judge Baraitser) ruled he couldn't be extradited to the US over concerns of 'risk of suicide' (and some mental health concerns) while not opposing the US gov on the more central political issue.

    In the US's appeal, now Britain's High Court has granted permission to the US to expand their grounds for appealing the decision to not send Assange to the US.

    Next trail date is Oct 29.


    APnews: US granted more grounds to appeal on Assange extradition  
  • British MPs and protesters go to Belmarsh prison demanding Assange be allowed access to them

  • Assange case witness says he lied to US officials to get immunity

    Many have commented that the mainstream media have been quiet about this revelation.

    Assange has been in a UK prison since April 2019 since Equador gave him up (removed their protection of him in their embassy in London). Extradition to the US for trial was recently denied, but not on the merits on the case, but rather on humanitarian grounds.

    The Icelander, who back in the early Wikileaks days had been a volunteer, had been convicted of forgery, fraud and some 'sex crimes,' and is, according to Assange's legal representatives, a dubious source.

     

Comments