On Fri, Sep 25, 2020 at 06:57:29PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gVoUPnXqvNE The War on Journalism: The
> Case of Julian Assange
> 
> Julian Assange MUST BE FREED.
> 
> "If wars can be started by lies,
> then they can be stopped by truth.
> -- Julian Assange"



   The Surreal US Case Against Assange
     Alexander Mercouris via ConsortiumNews.com
   
https://consortiumnews.com/2020/09/28/letter-from-london-the-surreal-us-case-against-assange/
   https://www.zerohedge.com/geopolitical/surreal-us-case-against-assange

   Zerohedge byline: The fox is guarding the henhouse and Washington is 
prosecuting a publisher for exposing its own war crimes... here is the best 
dissection of the incoherent US case against Julian Assange that we’ve seen...

      Following the Julian Assange case as it has progressed through its 
various stages, from the original Swedish allegations right up to and including 
the extradition hearing which is currently underway in the Central Criminal 
Court in London, has been a troubling and very strange experience.
      
https://consortiumnews.com/2019/06/04/more-good-news-for-assange-swedish-court-blocks-extradition-us-says-no-vault-7-indictment/

      The U.S. government has failed to present a coherent case. 

      Conscious that the British authorities should in theory refuse to 
extradite Assange if the case against him were shown to be politically 
motivated and/or related to Assange’s legitimate work as a journalist, the U.S. 
government has struggled to present a case against Assange which is not too 
obviously politically motivated or related to Assange’s legitimate work as a 
journalist. 

      This explains the strange succession of one original and two superseding 
indictments. 

      The U.S. government’s first indictment was based on what was a supposedly 
simple allegation of computer interference, supposedly coordinated in some sort 
of conspiracy between Assange and Chelsea Manning. 

      This was obviously done in an attempt to dispel the idea that the request 
for Assange’s extradition was politically motivated or was related to Assange’s 
legitimate work as a journalist. 

      However lawyers in the United States had no difficulty pointing out the 
“inchoate facts” of the alleged conspiracy between Assange and Manning, whilst 
both lawyers and journalists in the United States and elsewhere pointed out 
that the facts in the indictment in fact bore all the hallmarks of action by a 
journalist to protect a source.
      
https://pressfrom.info/us/news/opinion/-265266-alan-dershowitz-is-julian-assange-another-pentagon-papers-case.html

      The result was that the U.S. government replaced its indictment with a 
first superseding indictment, which this time was founded largely on the 1917 
Espionage Act, and was therefore closer to the real reasons why the case 
against Assange was being brought. 

      However, that made the case look altogether too obviously politically 
motivated, so it has in turn been replaced by a second superseding indictment, 
presented to the court and the defence team virtually on the eve of the trial, 
which has sought to veer back towards strictly criminal allegations, this time 
of involvement in computer hacking.

      More Problems for Another Indictment
      ...

Reply via email to