reSee.it - Related Post Feed
@TrevorFitzgibb1 - Trevor Fitzgibbon
.El Pais has unearthed shocking revelations concerning UC Global and its illegal surveillance of @WikiLeaks publisher #JulianAssange, attorneys & journalists who met with him. This "must-see" Zoom Press Conference occurs Wednesday, June 7, @ 1pm EST. DM me for more info.
@KimDotcom - Kim Dotcom
To understand the evil character of the US Govt just watch what they have done to Julian Assange. https://t.co/jFLKWVWT2R
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, is facing extradition to the US and potentially 175 years in prison for publishing classified documents exposing US war crimes. The case has raised concerns about press freedom and the treatment of whistleblowers. Assange has been subjected to illegal surveillance, mistreatment, and a lack of access to his lawyers. The extradition proceedings have been marred by irregularities, including conflicts of interest and a biased judiciary. The US government's relentless pursuit of Assange is seen as an attack on journalism and the public's right to know. The case has far-reaching implications for freedom of speech and the ability of journalists to hold the powerful accountable.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Press. Press. I'm press.
Speaker 1: I don't care. Get down.
Speaker 0: I am press.
Speaker 1: I don't care. Get down. Okay.
Speaker 0: I'm down. I'm down.
Speaker 2: I'm press.
Speaker 3: Please.
Speaker 4: We are at an extremely dangerous moment in the history of this country. Donald Trump wants to jail journalists who publish stories he doesn't like. Do you mind telling me why I'm under arrester? Why why am I under arrester? And he's wielding the espionage act like a chainsaw against journalistic sources.
Speaker 0: We're gonna find the Lakers. We're gonna find the Lakers. They're gonna pay a big price for the leaking.
Speaker 3: Let us think in for a second. At the same time that the US government is chasing journalist all over the world, they have decided that all foreign journalists Have no protection under the first amendment in the United States. So that goes to to to show the gravity of this case.
Speaker 1: What it looks like. Exactly what it looks like. We're at the same
Speaker 0: off? Amelia, you like Kai? And I'll ask
Speaker 5: the same question. You commit to not putting reporters in jail for doing their jobs?
Speaker 0: Well, I don't know that I can make a blanket commitment to that effect. We will, utilize the authorities that we have legally and constitutionally, if we have
Speaker 6: It's another attack on free press. Just like Julian Assange, after publishing information that exposed government corruption, Glenn Greenwald from the intercept has been charged.
Speaker 7: The claim the Brazilian government used against me was one modeled after the Assange indictment.
Speaker 0: It's a war on freedom of speech, and it's a war on journalists.
Speaker 7: The US government is ex asserting Universal jurisdiction to reach over to any journalist anywhere in the world that reports on it in a way that it doesn't like and prosecute them.
Speaker 8: Mister Assange was arrested
Speaker 9: this morning at about 10 o'clock
Speaker 8: at the Ecuadorian Embassy. This precedent means that any journalist
Speaker 9: can be Extradited for prosecution in the United States for having published truthful information about the United States.
Speaker 4: Come on. Fire.
Speaker 10: 1st, they came for Julian.
Speaker 3: Thank you.
Speaker 11: They will come
Speaker 10: for everybody else, our children, our friends.
Speaker 4: Thank you.
Speaker 12: There is a war on journalism, and Julian is at the center of that. But the point is that what happens to him can happen to any journalist who does his or her job.
Speaker 1: How did we get here? The case against Julian Assange started a decade ago, but today it is the case that will define press freedom And by consequence, your freedom of speech.
Speaker 13: This is my philosophical background, how I see this work that we're doing, and Maybe one other component is that while we can all write about our own political issues, we can all push for Particular things we can believe in, we can all have particular brands of politics, but I say, it's actually, it's all bankrupt. And the reason it's all bankrupt and all current political theories are bankrupt in particular lines of political thought is because actually we don't know what the hell is going on. And until we know the basic structures of our institutions, how they operate in practice, these Titanic organizations, how they behave inside, not just through stories but through vast amounts of internal documentation, Until we know that, how can we possibly make a diagnosis? How can we set the direction to go until we know where we are? We don't even have a map of where we are.
So our our first task is to build up the, sort of, the intellectual heritage that describes where we are. And once we know where we are, then we have a hope of setting course for a different direction. Until then, I think All political theories, to greater and lesser extents, of course, are bankrupt.
Speaker 1: In 2011, a secret grand jury was meeting in Alexandria, Virginia to consider indicting Julian Assange Under the Espionage Act.
Speaker 14: This isn't about who Julian Assange is because that's been used so much as a distraction And I think so much of the negative press about about Assange has been exactly about that. Has been exactly about, we'll get people to ignore what the issues are because we'll get them to to be distracted that this is not an issue about Press freedom is actually about an individual. It's not, it's about press freedom. You know, it doesn't matter who the individual was in that Position, that position needs to be defended. In this case, it is Julian, But the role that he undertook is one that absolutely needs defending by the rest of the media.
Speaker 1: The Obama administration concluded that there was no way to charge Assange without endangering press freedom. However, in 2019, the Trump administration Took a different approach. In an unprecedented move, the Justice Department has indicted WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange for his role in publishing US military and diplomatic documents exposing US war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. But Assange faces up to a 170 years in prison under the new charges. 10 years for each count of
Speaker 9: Also received and published that information, but that's true of journalists around the world all the time receiving information from government, including from the United States government. It does not make them spies, and it does not make it espionage.
Speaker 15: Assange is charged with soliciting and receiving classified information. What I do for a living. I solicit and I receive information. I ask questions and I hope to obtain answers. And, where there's evidence available, I I try to get the evidence.
Speaker 12: Journalists in the so called mainstream in its various forms are now realizing that it concerns them. They come for Julian Assange. They'll come for you.
Speaker 5: All these Practices of encryption, helping your sources, provide information legally are important for letting citizens and the world know what's going on. Otherwise, we're dependent on our government to tell us what's up, and I don't think That's a dependable way to get information out to citizens. They won't do that.
Speaker 16: Welcome to the State Department. I think we have some interns in the back. Welcome. Good to see you in this, exercise in transparency and democracy.
Speaker 0: Is that what it is?
Speaker 12: WikiLeaks is the most extraordinary development in journalism in my lifetime. WikiLeaks meant that everything you read was authentic, was accurate. You could judge it on its face value. There's no journalism. Even the best could never be a 100 percent authentic and accurate.
Speaker 1: In 2010, WikiLeaks started publishing the largest collection of US military and diplomatic secret documents in history. WikiLeaks first published a video of 2 American Apache helicopters murdering 11 people in Baghdad, among them, 2 Reuters journalists.
Speaker 17: This video alongside Maybe the images from Apo Ghraib are in a sense what the the Nepal Girl photo Tells us about the Vietnam War. So it captures so many elements of the Callousness, the, the bloodlust, and the the horror of the Iraq War.
Speaker 4: Item all up. Zero two traffic two sixties. Come on. Fire.
Speaker 12: If you watch it through, there's nowhere to go after it. You Can't be rationalized. It can't be excused.
Speaker 2: You don't need to be a specialist To see that US soldiers have been intentionally massacring people.
Speaker 18: Come on, buddy. My god. Just pick up a weapon.
Speaker 2: Even if they had some of them have carried Once they're wounded and out of combat, targeting them becomes a warcraft. So it's obvious.
Speaker 0: It's Bushmaster 7. Go ahead.
Speaker 18: Roger, we have a Black.
Speaker 4: That's shoot with our bongo truck picking up the body.
Speaker 19: Request permission to engage.
Speaker 0: Bookmaster 7, Roger. This is Bookmaster 7, Roger. Engage.
Speaker 4: 1 8 k.
Speaker 18: Clear. Come on. Claire. Claire.
Speaker 12: It was murder. 360 degree killing. That was the so called philosophy of the war. In other words, you killed everything within 360 degrees.
Speaker 1: The collateral murder video wasn't an isolated incident. WikiLeaks then published the Afghan and Iraq war logs, nearly half a 1000000 documents of detailed Incident reports conducted by the US that depicted the true cost of those wars.
Speaker 20: I'm not surprised by the data. What I am is deeply upset by the data. It's impossible to read the data. When you read about a 6 year old being tortured to death with a drill, when you read about an entire family being wiped out in a split second because Some 18 year old American soldier has decided that the car was going too fast and just opened fire. When you hear about, people being locked in a prison for 2 months and suspended from the ceiling by the Iraqi military.
When you read stories about Entire towns being decimated, or children being killed by hellfire missiles fired from US Apache helicopters Because they were gathering firewood. All these stories are horrific. They're, It's it's it's painful.
Speaker 11: It is Up to a court to decide clearly whether something is in the end of crime. That said, prima facie, there does appear to be evidence of war crimes in this material. Example is the Task Force 373 High Mars Missile Strike, On a house which killed 7 children. All we would like to see this material, the revelations that This material gives be taken seriously. Investigated, by governments and New policies put in place as a result, if not, prosecutions, of those people who have committed abuses.
Speaker 2: No one has been prosecuted for this. We have clear evidence for systematic torture. Again, the whistleblower the one who's being prosecuted, but not the perpetrators.
Speaker 21: For just the 3rd time since he was arrested over 2 years ago, alleged army whistleblower Bradley Manning was seen by the public this week. His 3 day pretrial hearing wraps up today before a military court at Fort Meade in Maryland. Manning faces 22 charges, including the capital offense of aiding the enemy as well as violating the Espionage Act, Computer fraud and theft of records. The 24 year old private is accused of leaking hundreds of thousands of documents to the whistle blowing website, WikiLeaks, Including secret files on the Iraq and Afghan wars. Manning's attorneys are seeking the dismissal of 10 of the counts.
Speaker 1: A few months after, WikiLeaks released Cablegate.
Speaker 22: That's the scale of it. A vast leak of thousands of documents From US embassies and other diplomatic outposts across the globe in all those countries, there are stories from every country involved that will embarrass, intrigue, and potentially complicate international relations.
Speaker 23: Among the specifics, worries about security at a Pakistan nuclear facility, Concern about alleged links between the Russian government and the mafia, plus allegations and examples of corruption within the Afghan government.
Speaker 4: Britain's Guardian newspaper said some cable showed Saudi King Abdullah repeatedly urging the US to attack Iran to destroy the program, And that leaders of other Arab nations referred to Tehran as an existential threat. Those documents
Speaker 12: I think for the general public, It was it was quite a revelation that people who have all the privileges of diplomats Actually, we're behaving like thugs.
Speaker 4: Italy's foreign minister calls the document release the September 11th of world diplomacy, In that everything once accepted as normal has now changed. But while the rep
Speaker 12: It was truth telling of the most powerful kind, most fearsome kind, almost. And, of course, there was a reaction.
Speaker 24: United States Strongly condemns the illegal disclosure.
Speaker 25: I think the man is a hot tech terrorist. He's done an Enormous. Yeah. The man's done Enormous damage, to our country. And I think he needs to be prosecuted to the fully fullest extent of the law.
And if that becomes a problem, we need to change The law,
Speaker 0: the way to deal with this is pretty simple. We got special ops forces. I mean, a dead man can't leak stuff. This guy is a traitor, a treasonous, and and And he has broken every law in the United States. The guy ought to be and I'm not for the death penalty.
So if I'm not for the death penalty and wanna do it, illegally shoot the son of
Speaker 12: a He's
Speaker 0: gonna talk about leaking had nothing to do with the leaking of those things. That was disgraceful. They don't think it's disgraceful. This should be like death penalty or something.
Speaker 12: That reaction we now see, Encapsulated in the almost Desperate bid by the United States to put Julian in a black hole and throw away the key. That's what they're talking about if he's extradited.
Speaker 11: There is an attempt now, a very worrying attempt in the United States to erect a new precedent, which is that in the national security sector, That any journalist that corresponds with a source is committing espionage if At some time, a classified communication is made. If if I am a conspirator to commit espionage, then all these other media organizations and the principal journalists in them are also conspirators, to commit espionage.
Speaker 26: That's absolutely true. Yes. That's absolutely true. I hadn't responded that. I was so excited about This conceals the fact they called it an escort.
There's a reaper UAV which proceeded to, loose off a hill by this which most probably means that her 2 children is traveling the sun the next day.
Speaker 1: With increasing pressure due to the publications, Julian Assange feared an imminent extradition to the US, and in 2012, was forced to seek asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy.
Speaker 10: I ask president Obama to do the right thing. The United States must renounce
Speaker 13: its witch hunt against WikiLeaks.
Speaker 10: The United States must dissolve its FBI investigation. The United States must vow that it will not seek to prosecute our staff or our supporters. The United States must pledge before the world that it will not pursue journalists for shining shining a light on the Secret crimes of the powerful. There must be no more foolish talk about prosecuting any media organization, Be it WikiLeaks or be it the New York Times.
Speaker 1: And so began Julian Assange's 7 year long stay inside the Tiny Ecuadorian embassy in Central London.
Speaker 13: Can everyone hear me? Hello, Cambridge. Can you hear me? I can hear you, Andrew. I can see a room.
Speaker 11: Hi. Hi, everyone. Just
Speaker 3: my
Speaker 27: name is Ed Snowden. I'm, 29 years old. I Worked for Booz Allen Hamilton as an infrastructure analyst for NSA, in Hawaii.
Speaker 11: 29 year old young man In a foreign jurisdiction that he had no experience with, the subject of the largest intelligence manhunt the world has ever seen. And the realities were, Edward Snowden knew he was going to be smashed. And at that moment, he reached out and asked us for help. We managed to get him out of Hong Kong, but when he landed in the Moscow airport, the, American government had canceled, if possible.
Speaker 27: While all of these news organizations stations around the world. All of these publishers were trying to get a piece of the story. And there was only 1 publisher It actually said, we wanna help the source. We wanna make sure he's okay. We wanna make sure that no matter what happens, know, he has somebody on his side, and that was WikiLeaks.
Speaker 1: Assange was aware of the possible consequences of helping Snowden.
Speaker 13: I I think that
Speaker 11: is a important lesson that, Actually, an organization that specializes in defeating surveillance for national security cases Was the organization that was able to do this? Yes. We had some diplomatic contacts, and and we certainly had the will, and the desire to not See another, Chelsea Manning. But I think a lot of it we couldn't have done that if, we hadn't specialized in these Secure communications techniques.
Speaker 1: Despite the increasing threats And deteriorating conditions in the embassy, WikiLeaks continued to publish.
Speaker 28: Some of the CIA's most sophisticated and effective spying tools. Apparently, pride opened tonight with the help of WikiLeaks. The anti secrecy group says it's obtained thousands of files.
Speaker 5: The CIA is equipped with a variety of hacking tools to crack into phones, cars, computers, even smart TVs.
Speaker 1: As a result of these publications, in 2017, the newly appointed director of the CIA, Mike Pompeo, in an unprecedented manner, dedicated his first public address to a publisher.
Speaker 29: Julian Assange and his kind are not the slightest bit interested in improving civil liberties or enhancing personal freedom. They have pretended America's First Amendment freedoms shield them from justice. They may have believed that, but they're wrong. WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service.
Speaker 1: The private security company, UC Global, hired by Ecuador to protect Assange, cut a deal with the CIA To spy on Assange and the Ecuadorian diplomats.
Speaker 9: Together with these is the immediate accessibility to the newest major exposition, convention, and meeting facility In the city of Las Vegas.
Speaker 1: In 2016, the owner of UC Global, David Morales, Flew to Las Vegas to attend a security fair.
Speaker 30: As soon as Morales returned from this fateful trip to Las Vegas, He began bragging to his employees back in southern Spain that we will from now on be playing in the first division using a, You know, soccer metaphor, football metaphor. But the they were violating their contract with Ecuador and secretly working for the Americans via Sheldon Adelson.
Speaker 1: The CIA laundered payments to UC Global through Las Vegas Sands, a company owned by Trump mega donor Sheldon Adelson.
Speaker 12: An
Speaker 1: An elaborate plan was set up between Morales and the CIA to install surveillance cameras with audio capabilities and implant covert microphones in strategic places such as below this fire extinguisher in the embassy's meeting room and behind this box in the Toilet. Assange held meetings in this toilet for fear of being spied on.
Speaker 3: Press.
Speaker 1: The CIA's increasing obsession to entrap Assange alarmed a UC Global Staffer who blew the whistle when asked to target Assange's family and even plot an attempt against his life.
Speaker 24: They came forward, And they spoke to our lawyers, and they exposed what had been going on there, because they had played a part in it. And they said that what their boss had been telling them is that they were working for the CIA and that those instructions about getting Gabriel's DNA that was coming from the other side of the Atlantic, these instructions were coming from the United States.
Speaker 31: It reads like some really terrible spy novel. Plots to kidnap, plots to possibly poison Julian Assange while he was in the embassy. I mean, it's almost too crazy to be real.
Speaker 24: And it is real. It's hard for people to understand that such lawlessness is possible. So there's Credible criminality that has been going on in order to gather information about out Julian's lawyers and his family and journalists who were visiting him. I mean, it's shocking, And I'm very fearful. I've been in a permanent state of fear for years.
Speaker 1: UC Global sent video, Audio and other information about Assange, WikiLeaks staff, his visitors, and the Ecuadorian diplomats to a CIA server. They also recorded Assange's medical consultations and went as far as recording Assange's privileged legal Conversations with his lawyers.
Speaker 32: When Daniel Ellsberg was, on trial for the Pentagon Papers during the Vietnam War, his case was thrown out because it came out that Nixon had ordered a rage on his psychologist's office to try and get information which was embarrassing to. So, of course, that should have happened, and that was right that it happened. Assange has been surveilled by the CIA. That by itself should mean the case is thrown out. There's no chance you can have a fair trial if the people who are prosecuting have been surveying the defendant as he's been Having privileged conversations with his lawyers, it's completely irregular that it hasn't been thrown out on those grounds already.
I mean, really is outrageous.
Speaker 2: I didn't expect to find torture, to be honest, I heard, well, this is, you know, the UK. They've arrested him. They they'll treat him well, you know. Maybe there's some issues, procedural issues, but, I was I was genuinely shocked then that we found all the symptoms that you would find typically in a person who has been exposed to psychological Torture. And in that context, I have to stress that psychological torture is by no means Torture lite.
It is very serious. In fact, psychological torture was initially Systematically developed by the Nazis. When they were not able to break resistance fighters with physical means, They developed psychological torture because it was even worse.
Speaker 12: He he was arrested in In April 2019, within a couple of months, probably less, he'd lost up to 15 kilos in weight And his brother Gabriel, who I went in to see him with once, was shocked when he held his arm and realized how thin he was. He was subjected to A psyops operation, I would think. It certainly had it had its effect on him Physically and no doubt mentally.
Speaker 2: Torture is being used against Julian Assange to intimidate the world, to show them If ever you get the idea to disclose our secrets and to wash our expose our dirty laundry to the world, this is what's gonna happen to
Speaker 24: I feel like Julian's life might be coming to an end. It's been 10 years, 9 years, no, 10 years of Breaking someone down, trying to destroy his life, and it's a well known pattern, You know, whistleblowers, people who expose the powerful. Okay. They destroy them.
Speaker 1: Throughout the 10 years that the Assange case has been ongoing. There have been a number of irregularities, the destruction of evidence by prosecutors, detention, lack of access to his lawyers, judges with alleged conflicts of interest, mistreatment, illegal espionage and the political nature of the charges themselves. All this is reason enough to shut the extradition proceedings and the prosecution down, but Assange still faces a 175 years in prison.
Speaker 9: Join Assange is now in a high security prison in conditions which are quite close to solitary confinement where he is at Serious risk of contracting COVID simply because of an indictment from the Trump administration in respect of publications for has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, publications for which he won the Walkley Award for Most Outstanding Contribution to Journalism. That's how stark This situation is
Speaker 10: Come on, buddy.
Speaker 18: I gotta do is pick up a weapon.
Speaker 32: We started by looking at the husband of the chief magistrate, Lady Abathinot, who's made a number of rulings on, on on Assange case. We Found that her her husband was a a conservative defense minister. He financially benefited corporations that had been exposed by WikiLeaks. We then did an investigation of her son, who is a cybersecurity expert and vice president of a private equity group, and we found that this private equity group was heavily invested in a firm called Darktrace, which was set up by the British in intelligence establishment. So huge conflicts of interest.
She has never recused herself in the case, which is irregular in itself Because I've talked to lawyers who have said if there's any hint of conflict of interest, judges will recuse themselves very early on, she never has.
Speaker 9: This is Constance. It's Constance. Yeah. Apparently, they they didn't know about the booth. So this is a constant problem, whether I'll turn up for a prison visit with him down at the and they won't have brought him out, which means I sit there on my own for an hour while he's coming in.
Or while we're coming into the prison, there's delays him because his huge queues and security is not working properly. So I don't actually get him to see him until half an hour after the actual visit time Started, and he's sitting there on his own wondering whether anyone's turning up, and it just means that a 2 hour visit ends up being only an hour or less, and we lose time. And so when we turn up to court being told that we'll have the whole day with him, and, instead, when then when we get there, we're told, no action. There's no facilities. You can only have an hour with him.
And this this has been constant for months months months on end, which has really limited our ability to get through any of the evidence. Okay. But she's a complicated place. Amount of evidence
Speaker 33: Assange is a symbol, really, of, of American the American state's affront of having his secrets put out in the public domain. You know, that's that's that's what it comes down to. And it's why I think of it as a political case. He's been blamed for a whole series of things, untrue. But the impetus behind the extradition request has has not stopped, which tells you it wasn't to do with those things.
It's The world will see it, legitimate journalists.
Speaker 2: Now what makes you think Julian Assange is going to get justice in the United States? In a court in East Virginia where the jury is selected from a population Where 85% are employed by CIA, NSA, DOD, or DOS.
Speaker 34: I hired OJ Simpson's jury consultant In my case, he has never lost a case. He represented OJ Simpson and William Kennedy Smith and George Zimmerman in the Trayvon Martin, case, he's a winner. And we got him a security clearance. He came to Washington, and he reviewed all the documents. And at the end of it, he said to me, if we were in any other district in America besides the eastern district of Virginia, I would say, let's go for it.
We're gonna win. But the Eastern District of Virginia, he said your jury would be made up of people From the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and intelligence community tractors or their family members. He said, you don't stand a chance in the Eastern District of Virginia. That's why they charged you there. I fear the same thing for Julian, that they charged him in the Eastern District of Virginia because it's called the espionage court, Because no no national security defendant has ever won a case there.
Speaker 2: And then we see now how the British judiciary Who has a long tradition of rule of law. A proud tradition of that Has delivered a complete travesty of a trial where the defendant has not had the right to to Prepare his defense where he has not had access to his own lawyers. Where we have court judges refusing to consider objections for conflicts of interest. Even in the UK, he's not gonna get a fair extradition trial. So this is no longer in the hands of the judiciary.
The judiciary is unwilling or unable to deal with this according to the rule of law. This is now in the hands of the public and in the hands of the media inform the public about what is going on. We do the science.
Speaker 1: On February 24, 2020, the first Part of Julian Assange's extradition hearing took place.
Speaker 35: I'm here from Reporters Without Borders. We've been monitoring all week. Today, We were again concerned about mister Assange's well-being, and frankly, the treatment is dehumanizing. The fact that he is an afterthought almost twice now this week, proceedings have started without a realization that he was not even yet present.
Speaker 3: Julian is not receiving a fair hearing. To start with, he can hardly and barely hear what's Going on at the courtroom, he cannot communicate with his lawyers without being observed and overheard by officials from the state department, from the embassy and from the eastern district court of Virginia. So how can he actually have a fair opportunity? And he as he said, when he was communicating attempted to communicate with the judge, there's been enough spying on the communication
Speaker 1: Due to COVID restrictions, Assange has not been allowed to see his lawyers in over 6 months. On June 24th, the US Department of Justice published a replacement superseding indictment on its website. But it was only delivered to the court three and a half weeks before the hearing and after the deadline to present new evidence had come and gone. This left Assange and his Defence team with little time to adequately prepare a defence. Facing 175 years in prison, Julian Assange will likely Please not see his lawyers until the day of the hearing.
Speaker 3: This is not about left or right in politics. We can unite on this. Please tell everybody that you know that they have to side with us and fight against the extradition. If they tell you I would rather fight for the environment or than animal cruelty or gender equality tell them they are about to take every right away from you you will not be able to Fight for any other cause. We are talking about the fundamentals here.
We have must fight against the resolution. We must save junior
@FreyjaTarte - Freyja™
Update on Julian Assange.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, held at Belmarsh prison, endures 23 hours of solitary confinement daily for over three years. This treatment aims to destroy him, despite his lack of conviction or charges beyond journalism. Surprisingly, some on the left have turned against him, including newspapers like The Guardian, which contributed to his imprisonment and vilification. Julian's spirit has suffered in solitary, leaving him feeling diminished and reduced. He hopes that our campaign for his freedom will allow him to rebuild his identity. It is our duty to support him, as Julian Assange is sacrificing his life for our right to know our government's actions conducted in secrecy.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: I visited Julian the other day at Belmarsh prison for the 2nd time, Britain's Guantanamo. He spends 23 hours every day for three and a half years in solitary confinement. This is an attempt not to break him but to kill him. It's slow murder of a man who's not been convicted, has not been charged of anything except journalism. I find it astonishing that there were people on the left who turned against Julian.
Newspapers like Guardian who played a role in his incarceration and vilification. Julian is holding on. Julian is not well. Julian's soul has been diminished by solitary. It feels, he told me, as if his personhood has been shrunk down to a tiny kernel.
And his hope is that if our campaign for him to become free again succeeds that he can grow his personality again from that kernel. This is our our duty because Julian Assange is dying for your right to know what your government is doing on your behalf behind your back.
@TrevorFitzgibb1 - Trevor Fitzgibbon
In a surprise move, the judge presiding over Kunstler et al v. Central Intelligence Agency has scheduled oral arguments re. CIA's Motion to Dismiss...and it's OPEN TO THE MEDIA AND PUBLIC #JulianAssange #WikiLeaks https://t.co/4QBQDuyL6f
reSee.it AI Summary
In a shocking revelation, Tucker Carlson claims that Mike Pompeo, former CIA director and Secretary of State, attempted to have Julian Assange, founder of WikiLeaks, murdered at the Ecuadorian embassy in London. Pompeo has not denied the accusation. Despite Assange being accused of telling the truth, he is being tortured while no one takes action. The attempt on Assange's life failed, but the sinister nature of Pompeo's actions raises concerns about his character. Watch the clip for more details.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
Oh boy.. 👀 Tucker Carlson - Mike Pompeo Tried to have Julian Assange Poisoned and Murdered at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London “Assange has been accused of telling the truth, period. And they are torturing him to death in front of all of us. No one's doing anything about it. And that Mike Pompeo is a very, very sinister person. The worst. And I always thought that, and I've told Trump that. Never should have allowed him to run CIA or state. But Mike Pompeo tried to have him murdered. And that's a criminal act. He's not even charged with a crime in the United States. And Mike Pompeo is CIA director. This came out, Pompeo didn't deny it. He tried to have Julian Assange murdered, poisoned in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. And that's a fact…” Trust Kansas or no? What’s important to me is the attempt failed. This Clip https://rumble.com/v3yw9km-tucker-carlson-mike-pompeo-tried-to-have-julian-assange-murdered.html Full Interview https://m.youtube.com/watch?si=-V3O9rpQJ3prA-Wo&v=EomprKFlSSw&feature=youtu.be
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker, who identifies as a liberal, shares their visit to a prison and seeing Julian Assange in London. They express their belief that people should only be imprisoned for valid reasons and highlight that Assange has been accused of telling the truth, not of fraud or criminal activities. They accuse Mike Pompeo, the former CIA director, of attempting to have Assange murdered, which Pompeo did not deny. The speaker questions why Pompeo is not in prison and criticizes those who falsely accused Assange of rape. They express disappointment in Trump for not pardoning Assange and criticize Pompeo for being a liar and flatterer.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: People in prison. Yeah. I guess I'm the liberal. Yeah. I I've I've visited.
I was in a prison last week. They're very depressing. I saw Julian Assange in London.
Speaker 1: I wanted to ask you
Speaker 0: Wouldn't put people in prison
Speaker 1: No.
Speaker 0: Except for a very good reason. And they
Speaker 1: Talk about the truth. Talk about the truth being illegal. Look at who's paid for it with dozens of people.
Speaker 0: Assange has never been accused of lying, or of fraud, or of making money in some criminal scheme. Assange has been accused of telling the truth, period. Yeah. And they are torturing him to death in front of All of us. No one's doing anything about it, and that Mike Pompeo was a very, very sinister person
Speaker 1: Isn't he?
Speaker 0: The worst. Mhmm. And I always thought that, and I've told Trump that. Never should have allowed him to run CIA or state, but Mike Pompeo tried to have him murdered, and that's a criminal act. He's not even charged with a crime in the United States, and And Mike Pompeo was CEO director.
This came out. Pompeo didn't deny it.
Speaker 1: I never heard this.
Speaker 0: Oh, yes.
Speaker 1: Oh, absolutely. I saw it. Oh, my god.
Speaker 0: He tried to have Julian Assange murdered, poisoned in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and that's a fact. Okay? And it's been established and okay.
Speaker 1: Yes.
Speaker 0: Why is Mike Pompeo not in prison? You're not allowed to murder people extra judicially, especially they haven't even been charged in the United States, which he had not been. Wow. So Mike Pompeo runs around to these stupid Republican donor events, and you're, like, a world expert on whatever, and he's a criminal, and he should be in jail. Like, if Julian Assange is in jail, how about the attempted murderer?
Right? What am I missing?
Speaker 1: How about the people that Put Julian Assange in jail. They should be in jail. 100%.
Speaker 0: 1st, they accused him falsely of rape. Rape. So, You know, that just shuts people down. Oh, he's a rapist. It's like kiddie porn.
It's like, I don't even wanna know more of your bad. Right. But then it starts out there was not enough evidence to charge him. He he didn't commit rape. That was a lie.
He's never been accused of doing anything. He's by the way, he spent four and a half years in prison in the UK at Bellmarsh prison, which is where it's with all the murderers in London.
Speaker 1: Good God.
Speaker 0: He's never been charged with a crime Wow. In the United Kingdom. To this day, he's not charged with a crime. He's being held at the request of the US government, and he's just sitting there, and they're they're torturing to death. I mean, he's, of course, dying as you are when you spent a total of, what, 13 years now
Speaker 1: Jeez.
Speaker 0: In incarceration. So, it's I wanted Trump to pardon him.
Speaker 1: I was Disappointed.
Speaker 0: I was I was disappointed. I and I think, you know, Trump I would say one, I think, very fair criticism of Trump is he does tend to surround himself with some of the most mediocre people. Yeah. And then
Speaker 1: I don't think he can find better.
Speaker 0: That may be right. But I have to say Mike Pompeo, and I saw it up close, and I saw it intimately close, is a liar and a flatterer, but where are the flatterers? You know, if someone comes up to you and says, I don't like you. Fuck you, and here's why. Mhmm.
I can deal with that.
Speaker 1: I can too.
Speaker 0: If someone's like, you know, I really think you may be the reincarnation of the godhead.
Tucker Carlson - Mike Pompeo Tried to have Julian Assange Murdered
Tip/Donating (everything I do is free, so any tips are appreciated) https://www.givesendgo.com/theunshakeablepundit Truth Seeker in my Spare Time You Can Follow Me at: Telegram is my home base of Oper
rumble.com
reSee.it AI Summary
Julian Assange faces a 175-year sentence if extradited to the US for publishing. His reporting exposed the infamous Collateral Murder release, revealing the killing of over a dozen people, including journalists, by US forces in Iraq. This crucial information came to light thanks to Assange. #FreeAssange
@wikileaks - WikiLeaks
Julian Assange faces a 175 year sentence if extradited to the US for his publishing WikiLeaks infamous Collateral Murder release shows the killing over a dozen people in Iraq by US forces, including two Reuters journalists; seriously wounding two children - which only came to light due to Assange's reporting #FreeAssange https://collateralmurder.wikileaks.org/
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker 0 instructs the team to gather for item 2. Speaker 1 reports traffic. Speaker 0 acknowledges and thanks them. Speaker 2 urgently tells Bushmaster 26 to move. Speaker 0 confirms engagement of 8 individuals and ongoing firing. Speaker 1 apologizes for damage. Speaker 0 grants clearance. Speaker 1 and Speaker 0 discuss targets. Speaker 2 communicates with Hotel 26 and Crazy Horse 18 about engaging 8 individuals with RPGs and AK 47s. Speaker 0 gives instructions to move to the location for pictures. Speaker 1 confirms. Speaker 0 expresses satisfaction with the engagement. Speaker 2 communicates with Bushmaster 7.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Alright. Fire. Here Wednesday line. Let me know when you've gathered for 2. Item all up.
Speaker 1: 2 zero two traffic, 2 60.
Speaker 0: Come on. Fire. Horizon. Thank
Speaker 1: you.
Speaker 0: Six. 2.
Speaker 2: Bushmaster 26. Bushmaster 26. We need to move time now.
Speaker 0: Seven. Alright. We just engaged all 8 individuals. And we got 2. We're we're still firing.
Got it. Got it.
Speaker 1: Six. This is 26. We're moving. We got this. Oh, I'm sorry.
Speaker 0: I was bypassing. Got damaged, Kyle. Sorry. Alright. You're clear.
Alright. I'm just trying to find targets again.
Speaker 1: Six. Master 6. This is Bushmaster 26.
Speaker 0: Got a bunch of bodies laying there. Alright. We got about 8 individuals. Yeah. We got 1 guy 2 around down there, but, you know, we could definitely get a jump or shoot some more.
Got it. 6. Hey. You shoot. I'll talk.
Hotel 26 crazy horse 18.
Speaker 2: Crazy horse 18, This is hotel 26
Speaker 0: over. Roger, currently engaging approximately 8 individuals, AIA, RPGs and AK 47.
Speaker 2: Cell 2 6, you need to move to that location once crazy one is done and get pictures over.
Speaker 0: 2 20 and the location. The hotel 26 crazy horse 18. Oh, yeah. There goes dead bastards. Nice.
Nice. 26. Crazy horse 18. 6.
Speaker 1: 2
Speaker 0: 2 Hotel 26, crazy horse 18.
Speaker 2: Crazy. You're towards 18 Bushmaster 7. Go ahead.
Collateral Murder
collateralmurder.wikileaks.org
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson explains his decision to interview Julian Assange, highlighting the concerning revelation that Mike Pompeo, former CIA director, allegedly planned to assassinate Assange before any charges were filed. Carlson questions the legality of using taxpayer money to murder someone who embarrassed government officials and expresses his disbelief that Pompeo has not faced consequences for this. This information motivated Carlson to pursue the interview.
@TheChiefNerd - Chief Nerd
👀 Tucker Carlson on Why He Felt Compelled to Interview Julian Assange "Then you find out that before [Assange] was charged with any crime in the United States that Mike Pompeo, who was the director of the CIA, decided to kill him, to assassinate him before he'd been charged with a crime. And then you think to yourself, wait a second, are federal appointees in my country allowed to use my tax dollars to murder people who embarrassed them? I don't think they're allowed to do that. In fact, I think that's a felony. But Mike Pompeo is not in jail...Once I started to learn more about that, I was like, I'm just going over there." @TuckerCarlson @jimmy_dore
Video Transcript AI Summary
Assange has been held in a UK prison without being charged with a crime. The US government wants to indict him, and the British government agreed to keep him in isolation until it's resolved. Before being charged in the US, the CIA director, Mike Pompeo, discussed assassinating Assange. This raises concerns about federal appointees using taxpayer money to murder someone who embarrassed them. Pompeo, however, remains free and even visits donors. It's disturbing that our government would use our money to kill someone who exposed their crimes, and no one seems to have a problem with it. This led the speaker to visit Assange, which turned out to be worse than expected.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: But in the case of Assange, like, if you read if if you follow that case at all and you sort of push a tiny bit, like, well, okay, what's his crime? You know, he spent four and a half years in the most in the worst prison in the UK. What has he been charged with in the UK? Nothing. He has not been charged with a crime in Great Britain.
Period. And so why is he in jail? Well, because the US government It's trying to indite him. And the British government has agreed to hold him in a maximum security cell in isolation until that's resolved. Well, like, what is this?
And then you find out that before he was charged with any crime in the United States, that Mike Pompeo, Who is the director of the CIA decide to kill him, to assassinate him before he'd been charged with a crime. And then you think to yourself, wait a second. Are federal appointees in my country allowed to use my tax dollars to murder people who embarrass them? I don't think they're allowed to do that. In fact, I think that's a felony.
But Mike Pompeo was not in jail. In fact, he's bombing around to the same donors that, you know, they all go to. And not just on the right, the right. But I mean, Nikki Haley's donors, but they're also Chuck Schumer's donors. And Those people are all cool with that.
That our government using our money in our name would murder a guy I because he dared to embarrass them by uncovering actual crimes that they committed. And everyone knows this, and no one has a problem with it. And none of that is speculation. It's all been proven. And Mike Pompeo was confronted with the fact that he discussed at CIA as its director murdering Julian Assange.
And his response was, anybody who leaked that information is guilty of a crime because you violated our classification laws. Really? What about the guy who is discussing on public property as a public official murdering somebody using Federal funds. That's not a crime? Are you freaking like, this is it's too crazy for me.
I can't deal with it. So once I started to learn more about that, I was like, I I'm just going over there. And I I love his wife. His cell is a wonder as I know I'm sure you know her. But she's really a a smart and humane and just decent good person.
And It just bothered me so much that I literally just and I didn't have a job. I was like, okay. I'm not doing anything. So it takes 5 hours to get there. I just flew over and went to see him.
And it was worse than I imagined.
@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson
TC Shorts: Julian Assange https://t.co/usckyGH9B2
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, a journalist and founder of WikiLeaks, has faced backlash from the media and governments for exposing concealed information. He published secret documents, including a video showing a US military attack on civilians in Iraq, contradicting the government's claims. Assange also leaked internal emails from the Democratic Party, revealing the rigging of the 2016 Democratic primary. As a result, he has been charged with fake crimes, imprisoned in the Ecuadorian embassy, and currently held in solitary confinement in the UK. The US government aims to extradite him under the espionage act, despite lacking evidence. This treatment highlights the immoral and grotesque actions taken to silence Assange.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Julian Assange is one of the greatest journalists of our age. He spent his entire adult life bringing previously concealed facts to the public about what our leaders are doing. That is the very definition of journalism. Yet Julian Assange is not a hero in America's newsrooms. He's an enemy.
Speaker 1: Alright, John.
Speaker 0: Assange made the mistake of offending the media's real constituency, which is not the public, but the powerful. For doing this, journalists accused Assange of being what they are, a political operative posing as a reporter. In 2010, Assange and his organization, WikiLeaks, published an enormous cache of secret documents revealed what the US government had been doing in Iraq. Included was a 38 minute gun sight video that depicted Apache helicopters mowing down a group of Civilians in Baghdad, including 2 Reuters employees.
Speaker 1: There's more that keep walking by, and one of them has a weapon. Roger Hand it down there. Oh, yeah. I got the answer. That's a weapon.
Yeah. So two six. It's crazy. 1 8. I'll bring that RPG.
Alright. We got Hey, Roger. Alright. We just engaged all 8 individuals.
Speaker 0: The video is a problem for the government because officials had lied about what happened that day. At one point, the Pentagon claimed the video didn't even exist. Assange proved that it did. A few years later, Assange upended a presidential race by publishing a trove of internal emails from the Democratic Party. Democrats claimed the emails have been hacked by the Russian government, but they hadn't been.
That was a lie. The emails had been leaked from within the DNC itself, almost certainly by a disgruntled employee. Those emails prove that Hillary Clinton's campaign had rigged the 2016 Democratic primary against Bernie Sanders. It was the scoop of the decade, but it was only one of many that Julian Assange broke. For the crime of upstaging them and embarrassing their patrons, the media hated Julian Assange even more.
Speaker 2: And especially with Assange, what what bothers me the most
Speaker 1: is that he hides under this sort of broad definition of a journalist. And we have to come out and say that this is not, you know, stealing and and using disinformation for a foreign government is not journalism.
Speaker 3: This is a no Reiner, this guy, Julian Assange, directed and led an organization that led to the largest breach of classified information in US history. This is not some do gooder whistleblower.
Speaker 0: Assange is a criminal. He's damaged national security. Assange isn't Journalist. He's a criminal, squeaked the faithful servants of power. Embarrassed governments around the world agreed.
The government of Sweden acting in concert with British authorities charged Assange with a fake sex crime. He's a rapist, they said. Global media amplified the lie. Ultimately, the charges were dropped for lack of evidence. But by that point, Julian Assange was a prisoner.
He'd been driven into internal exile in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he sought political asylum. He spent more than 7 years there, unable to leave. Then in 2017, Teen Assange broke his last big story. WikiLeaks revealed the existence of an illegal CIA spying program. Assange withheld most of the details of that program so as not to compromise American national security.
But the story was still deeply humiliating to the CIA. In Washington, CIA director Mike Pompeo decided to murder him. Pompeo discussed with his deputies how the CIA might kidnap Assange from the embassy in London or poison him inside. That is not conjecture. Multiple witnesses heard Mike Pompeo say that.
At the time, keep in mind, Julian Assange should not been charged with any crime in the United States. Mike Pompeo considered it a death penalty offense to embarrass the CIA. You may be asking, is any of this legal? Can federal appointees use tax dollars to kill people who annoy them? Well, not technically.
Mike Pompeo committed a felony conspiracy to commit murder. And yet somehow, Mike Pompeo is not in prison. Instead, he's the toast of the donor class, A friend and adviser to the most powerful people in America. It's Julian Assange who's in prison for the crime of offending Mike Pompeo. Assange is currently being held behind bars by the British government, which has not charged him with any crime.
Assange now sits in those fortified penitentiary in the UK, Bell Marsh, where every murderer in London is held. He's been there for more than 4 years trapped in solitary confinement, cut off from his wife and 2 children, wasting away alone among killers and mental patients, and awaiting extradition to the United States for trial. Assange has been charged in the US under the century old espionage act, a transparently unconstitutional law, which is used almost exclusively to punish political crimes. Yet Julian Assange has never committed espionage, nor does the US government have any real interest in trying him under that law. His current incarceration is the whole point.
Torture Assange to death in jail so he will never again speak publicly. It's all so grotesque and so immoral that it's hard to believe it's actually happening in public view. Bell Marsh authorities will not allow Assange to be interviewed, lest his case bring more embarrassment to the CIA. But we decided to travel there to see him
reSee.it AI Summary
Julian Assange's revelations include Pompeo's alleged attempt to harm him, DNC's manipulation of the primary, civilian casualties in Iraq, and an illegal CIA spying program. The author expresses astonishment and credits Trump's presidency for the exposure, anticipating more revelations to come.
@MJTruthUltra - UltraMJTruth
https://t.co/TfpCuELHxF Holy SHIZ! Julian Assange on deck 👀 • Pompeo tried to poison Julian Assange • The DNC rigged the democratic primary • Apache helicopters killed civilians in Iraq, including two Reuters employees • The existence of an illegal CIA spying program I cannot believe I am alive to witness what is taking place and what is being revealed. These things would have never have been revealed if Donald Trump had not become president. And there’s so much more on the way.
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, a journalist and founder of WikiLeaks, has faced backlash from the media for exposing concealed information about government actions. In 2010, Assange released secret documents, including a video showing a US military attack on civilians in Iraq. He later published internal emails from the Democratic Party, revealing the manipulation of the 2016 Democratic primary. As a result, Assange became a target of the media and governments worldwide. He sought asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London but was eventually arrested. Despite not being charged with any crime in the US, Assange remains imprisoned and faces extradition. The treatment he has endured is seen as an attempt to silence him and prevent further disclosures.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Julian Assange is one of the greatest journalists of our age. He spent his entire adult life bringing previously concealed facts to the public about what our leaders are doing. That is the very definition of journalism. Yet Julian Assange is not a hero in America's newsrooms. He's an enemy.
Speaker 1: Alright, John.
Speaker 0: Assange made the mistake of offending the media's real constituency, which is not the public, but the powerful. For doing this, journalists accused Assange of being what they are, a political operative posing as a reporter. In 2010, Assange and his organization, WikiLeaks, published an enormous cache of secret documents revealed what the US government had been doing in Iraq. Included was a 38 minute gun sight video that depicted Apache helicopters mowing down a group of Civilians in Baghdad, including 2 Reuters employees.
Speaker 1: There's more that keep walking by, and one of them has a weapon. Roger Hand it down there. Oh, yeah. I got the answer. That's a weapon.
Yeah. So two six. It's crazy. 1 8. I'll bring that RPG.
Alright. We got Hey, Roger. Alright. We just engaged all 8 individuals.
Speaker 0: The video is a problem for the government because officials had lied about what happened that day. At one point, the Pentagon claimed the video didn't even exist. Assange proved that it did. A few years later, Assange upended a presidential race by publishing a trove of internal emails from the Democratic Party. Democrats claimed the emails have been hacked by the Russian government, but they hadn't been.
That was a lie. The emails had been leaked from within the DNC itself, almost certainly by a disgruntled employee. Those emails prove that Hillary Clinton's campaign had rigged the 2016 Democratic primary against Bernie Sanders. It was the scoop of the decade, but it was only one of many that Julian Assange broke. For the crime of upstaging them and embarrassing their patrons, the media hated Julian Assange even more.
Speaker 2: And especially with Assange, what what bothers me the most
Speaker 1: is that he hides under this sort of broad definition of a journalist. And we have to come out and say that this is not, you know, stealing and and using disinformation for a foreign government is not journalism.
Speaker 3: This is a no Reiner, this guy, Julian Assange, directed and led an organization that led to the largest breach of classified information in US history. This is not some do gooder whistleblower.
Speaker 0: Assange is a criminal. He's damaged national security. Assange isn't Journalist. He's a criminal, squeaked the faithful servants of power. Embarrassed governments around the world agreed.
The government of Sweden acting in concert with British authorities charged Assange with a fake sex crime. He's a rapist, they said. Global media amplified the lie. Ultimately, the charges were dropped for lack of evidence. But by that point, Julian Assange was a prisoner.
He'd been driven into internal exile in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he sought political asylum. He spent more than 7 years there, unable to leave. Then in 2017, Teen Assange broke his last big story. WikiLeaks revealed the existence of an illegal CIA spying program. Assange withheld most of the details of that program so as not to compromise American national security.
But the story was still deeply humiliating to the CIA. In Washington, CIA director Mike Pompeo decided to murder him. Pompeo discussed with his deputies how the CIA might kidnap Assange from the embassy in London or poison him inside. That is not conjecture. Multiple witnesses heard Mike Pompeo say that.
At the time, keep in mind, Julian Assange should not been charged with any crime in the United States. Mike Pompeo considered it a death penalty offense to embarrass the CIA. You may be asking, is any of this legal? Can federal appointees use tax dollars to kill people who annoy them? Well, not technically.
Mike Pompeo committed a felony conspiracy to commit murder. And yet somehow, Mike Pompeo is not in prison. Instead, he's the toast of the donor class, A friend and adviser to the most powerful people in America. It's Julian Assange who's in prison for the crime of offending Mike Pompeo. Assange is currently being held behind bars by the British government, which has not charged him with any crime.
Assange now sits in those fortified penitentiary in the UK, Bell Marsh, where every murderer in London is held. He's been there for more than 4 years trapped in solitary confinement, cut off from his wife and 2 children, wasting away alone among killers and mental patients, and awaiting extradition to the United States for trial. Assange has been charged in the US under the century old espionage act, a transparently unconstitutional law, which is used almost exclusively to punish political crimes. Yet Julian Assange has never committed espionage, nor does the US government have any real interest in trying him under that law. His current incarceration is the whole point.
Torture Assange to death in jail so he will never again speak publicly. It's all so grotesque and so immoral that it's hard to believe it's actually happening in public view. Bell Marsh authorities will not allow Assange to be interviewed, lest his case bring more embarrassment to the CIA. But we decided to travel there to see him
@wikileaks - WikiLeaks
Video: Inside the CIA's plot to assassinate Julian Assange #FreeAssange https://t.co/9ixDqjMnkA
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, became a target for the US government after embarrassing them with leaked classified information. The CIA considered various plans to capture or kill him, including kidnapping him from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London where he was hiding. The embassy, unbeknownst to Assange, had been spying on him for US intelligence. Assange released Vault 7, exposing the CIA's hacking division and tactics, which infuriated the agency. He was eventually arrested, charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, and faces a potential 170 years in prison. Assange's fate remains uncertain.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This guy is a traitor, a treasonous, and and and he has broken every law of the United States. And I'm not for the death penalty. So if I'm not for the death penalty and wanna do it, illegally shoot the son of a
Speaker 1: Date, 2017. Target, Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. Location, the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Objective, killer capture. Origins of this order from, quote, the Highest levels, end quote, of the US government and CIA.
In the song of the to be arrested. Funded. To be sold. Please find the out. Normally, a target like Assange would be easy.
Grab him from his way home from work or shoot him as he walks to get his morning coffee. The only problem was Assange did none of these things. He hadn't done any of those things in years. For 5 years, Julian Assange had been hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Killing him there are sending in the police would go against international law and be a foreign relations disaster, so the CIA had to concoct another plan.
1st, they discussed secretly kidnapping him from the embassy and bringing him back to America, but that would make it too obvious America broke the law. So they changed tactics, Kidnap him, turn him over to the British. That way, no one would know who was behind it then. Right? But then there was still the chance he wouldn't get extradited back to the US If the British police got him, eventually, they got so desperate that they had no choice.
They discussed the unthinkable. Did the CIA A plot and plan to kill Julian Assange. Well, unthinkable for everyone else, very unthinkable for the CIA. Going against every international law, they contemplated assassinating Julian Assange in the embassy where he lived. Poisoned, snipers, sending in That says nothing was off the table.
Quote, it got to the point where every human being in a three block radius of the embassy in London was working for 1 of the intelligence services, Whether they were street sweepers or police officers or security guards, end quote. It turns out that UC Global, the company that embassy paid to keep Assad Safe had been spying on him for US intelligence all along, the same company that embassy paid more than $5,000,000 to over the last 7 years. WikiLeaks changed the game. When it launched in 2006, it was like nothing the world had ever seen before. Anyone with any important information or proof of classified secrets could submit their data to WikiLeaks anonymously.
Something that was not very common back then. What made WikiLeaks different from other whistleblower organizations is that they can never really be charged with stealing information. They didn't do any of the hacking themselves. So to a certain extent, they were innocent, which led to one other major advantage WikiLeaks had. Since they weren't involved in stealing the information, the classified documents they published could be used in courts.
This was a game changer and terrifying for powerful people with dark secrets to hide. In April 2010, WikiLeaks releases this video. It's a Simple, low quality video from an Apache helicopter involved in a Baghdad airstrike on July 12, 2007. This video was an airstrike that killed 18 people, Pretty center stuff to the US military. What was strange, however, was that for a group of armed insurgents, they seem to be walking around rather calmly while a loud, heavily armed, unmistakably The way Western Apache helicopter was roaming above.
But rest assured, the US military promised us that, quote, there is no question that coalition forces were Clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force. Boom, hello. There's nothing to see here. These were not enemy insurgents hostile forces that the US military shot up, but 2 unarmed photographers for the news agency Reuters, Namir Nur Aldine and his driver Sahid Chamah. The pilots mistook their cameras for weapons and a myriad of other casualties that didn't have any weapons or seem to be hostile at all.
The US military just tried to cover up friendly fire on journalists. And almost instantly, the video was spread to every newspaper and online publication around the world. Of course, our top story this morning, the White House blasting the release of over 90,000 US military records on the war in Afghanistan. On August 16, 2012, it. The foreign minister of Ecuador announced that Julian Assange had been given asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
Speaker 2: We trust that the United Kingdom will offer, as soon as possible, the guarantee for the safe passage for this asylum of mister Assange and that they We'll respect those international agreements that they have signed in the past and that they have always respected.
Speaker 1: A tiny office in the embassy was converted into a studio with a bed, shower, Treadmill, kitchenette, and computer. If he had guests, they'd visit him in his little studio. His lawyers, therapist, and even a personal trainer had to make do with the small space. If he ever stepped foot outside the embassy, British police officers were front and center, ready to arrest him on the spot for skipping bail. And he would stay trapped I've been in the embassy for 5 years before WikiLeaks released their most damaging data dump yet, all at the cost of the US government's dignity.
Julian Assange was a target for the US government under both president Obama and president Trump. He embarrassed the military, showed them how weak their security was, and on March 7, 2017, he released what they called Vault 7, arguably the most embarrassing data 3 of the CIA and the US governments. What was in Vault 7? All the internal documentation regarding the CIA's ultra secret hacking division and its tactics. The guys who were supposed to be the best Attackers in the world had apparently been hacked.
This breach was not just embarrassing. It took away years of agency pride and dignity. The organization tasked with keeping America's secrets Couldn't even stop a leak of their most classified information. Vault 7 had it all. Details on electronic surveillance equipment, cyber warfare weapons, And how they could break into almost every cell phone operating system on the planets all out in the open for the world to see.
Agency officials used to, quote, laugh about WikiLeaks, end quotes, Mocking the state department and the Pentagon for allowing so much material to escape their control. But now it was their turn. And for the CIA, revenge wasn't even a question. It was the only answer. Their blood was boiling, and all they could see was red.
An example had to be made. And the main targets? Of course, it was Julian Assange. WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service. This new classification was bureaucratic speak that now justified the use of offensive measures against this non state hostile intelligence service.
The fight was on, and according to Mike Pompeo, there were no rules. After his speech, he gave CIA officers the order to figure The, quote, art of the possible, end quote. He said, quote, nothing's off limits. Don't self censor yourself. I need operational ideas from you.
I'll worry about the lawyers in Washington, end quote. On April 2, 2019, President Lenin Moreno announced Assange was no longer welcome at the embassy. Assange had very little time to prepare when 9 days later, the Ecuadorian government invited British police Into the embassy to arrest Assange on the basis of skipping bail, that very same day, Assange was found guilty and sentenced 50 weeks in prison starting May 1st. The US's time had come. Assange had been secretly indicted over a year earlier in March 2018.
And on the Same day he was arrested in London, the indictment was unsealed. He was charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. A month later, while serving his sentence In the Belle Marsh prison, the US added 17 charges to the list. The maximum sentence, a 170 years in prison. A harder and 70 years for the leader of an organization that wasn't all that different from other news agencies that published leaks.
At his Extradition hearing in May 2019, as such said, quote, I do not wish to surrender myself for extradition for doing journalism that has won many, many awards and protected many people, End quote. Julian Assange is currently still in Belmarsh prison at the time of recording this video. It. If he's extradited, he faces solitary confinement in a supermax prison, a 170 years in prison for someone who did the same job as most journalists out there. Where I wouldn't be surprised if he met the same fate as our friend whose first name starts with a j and last name starts with an e.
Time will tell what the future holds for the whistleblower pioneer.
@wikileaks - WikiLeaks
BREAKING: Alleged WikiLeaks Vault 7 whistleblower Joshua Schulte given a 40 year sentence in a New York federal court today Watch: Inside the CIA's plot to assassinate Julian Assange The Vault 7 revelations led to a plot by the CIA to assassinate the publisher Julian Assange https://t.co/kr6e2gtwe6
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks, became a target for the US government after embarrassing them with leaked classified information. The CIA considered various plans to capture or kill him, but his asylum at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London made it difficult. The embassy's own security company, UC Global, was revealed to have been spying on Assange for the US. WikiLeaks' unique ability to publish classified documents without being involved in their theft made it a game changer. The release of the "Collateral Murder" video in 2010 exposed the US military's cover-up of friendly fire on journalists. Assange's most damaging release, Vault 7, revealed the CIA's hacking division's vulnerabilities. After being arrested and sentenced in the UK, Assange faces extradition to the US and a potential 170-year prison sentence.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: This guy is a traitor, a treasonous, and and and he has broken every law of the United States. And I'm not for the death penalty. So if I'm not for the death penalty and wanna do it, illegally shoot the son of a
Speaker 1: Date, 2017. Target, Julian Assange, the founder of WikiLeaks. Location, the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Objective, killer capture. Origins of this order from, quote, the Highest levels, end quote, of the US government and CIA.
In the song of the to be arrested. Funded. To be sold. Please find the out. Normally, a target like Assange would be easy.
Grab him from his way home from work or shoot him as he walks to get his morning coffee. The only problem was Assange did none of these things. He hadn't done any of those things in years. For 5 years, Julian Assange had been hiding in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Killing him there are sending in the police would go against international law and be a foreign relations disaster, so the CIA had to concoct another plan.
1st, they discussed secretly kidnapping him from the embassy and bringing him back to America, but that would make it too obvious America broke the law. So they changed tactics, Kidnap him, turn him over to the British. That way, no one would know who was behind it then. Right? But then there was still the chance he wouldn't get extradited back to the US If the British police got him, eventually, they got so desperate that they had no choice.
They discussed the unthinkable. Did the CIA A plot and plan to kill Julian Assange. Well, unthinkable for everyone else, very unthinkable for the CIA. Going against every international law, they contemplated assassinating Julian Assange in the embassy where he lived. Poisoned, snipers, sending in That says nothing was off the table.
Quote, it got to the point where every human being in a three block radius of the embassy in London was working for 1 of the intelligence services, Whether they were street sweepers or police officers or security guards, end quote. It turns out that UC Global, the company that embassy paid to keep Assad Safe had been spying on him for US intelligence all along, the same company that embassy paid more than $5,000,000 to over the last 7 years. WikiLeaks changed the game. When it launched in 2006, it was like nothing the world had ever seen before. Anyone with any important information or proof of classified secrets could submit their data to WikiLeaks anonymously.
Something that was not very common back then. What made WikiLeaks different from other whistleblower organizations is that they can never really be charged with stealing information. They didn't do any of the hacking themselves. So to a certain extent, they were innocent, which led to one other major advantage WikiLeaks had. Since they weren't involved in stealing the information, the classified documents they published could be used in courts.
This was a game changer and terrifying for powerful people with dark secrets to hide. In April 2010, WikiLeaks releases this video. It's a Simple, low quality video from an Apache helicopter involved in a Baghdad airstrike on July 12, 2007. This video was an airstrike that killed 18 people, Pretty center stuff to the US military. What was strange, however, was that for a group of armed insurgents, they seem to be walking around rather calmly while a loud, heavily armed, unmistakably The way Western Apache helicopter was roaming above.
But rest assured, the US military promised us that, quote, there is no question that coalition forces were Clearly engaged in combat operations against a hostile force. Boom, hello. There's nothing to see here. These were not enemy insurgents hostile forces that the US military shot up, but 2 unarmed photographers for the news agency Reuters, Namir Nur Aldine and his driver Sahid Chamah. The pilots mistook their cameras for weapons and a myriad of other casualties that didn't have any weapons or seem to be hostile at all.
The US military just tried to cover up friendly fire on journalists. And almost instantly, the video was spread to every newspaper and online publication around the world. Of course, our top story this morning, the White House blasting the release of over 90,000 US military records on the war in Afghanistan. On August 16, 2012, it. The foreign minister of Ecuador announced that Julian Assange had been given asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
Speaker 2: We trust that the United Kingdom will offer, as soon as possible, the guarantee for the safe passage for this asylum of mister Assange and that they We'll respect those international agreements that they have signed in the past and that they have always respected.
Speaker 1: A tiny office in the embassy was converted into a studio with a bed, shower, Treadmill, kitchenette, and computer. If he had guests, they'd visit him in his little studio. His lawyers, therapist, and even a personal trainer had to make do with the small space. If he ever stepped foot outside the embassy, British police officers were front and center, ready to arrest him on the spot for skipping bail. And he would stay trapped I've been in the embassy for 5 years before WikiLeaks released their most damaging data dump yet, all at the cost of the US government's dignity.
Julian Assange was a target for the US government under both president Obama and president Trump. He embarrassed the military, showed them how weak their security was, and on March 7, 2017, he released what they called Vault 7, arguably the most embarrassing data 3 of the CIA and the US governments. What was in Vault 7? All the internal documentation regarding the CIA's ultra secret hacking division and its tactics. The guys who were supposed to be the best Attackers in the world had apparently been hacked.
This breach was not just embarrassing. It took away years of agency pride and dignity. The organization tasked with keeping America's secrets Couldn't even stop a leak of their most classified information. Vault 7 had it all. Details on electronic surveillance equipment, cyber warfare weapons, And how they could break into almost every cell phone operating system on the planets all out in the open for the world to see.
Agency officials used to, quote, laugh about WikiLeaks, end quotes, Mocking the state department and the Pentagon for allowing so much material to escape their control. But now it was their turn. And for the CIA, revenge wasn't even a question. It was the only answer. Their blood was boiling, and all they could see was red.
An example had to be made. And the main targets? Of course, it was Julian Assange. WikiLeaks walks like a hostile intelligence service and talks like a hostile intelligence service. This new classification was bureaucratic speak that now justified the use of offensive measures against this non state hostile intelligence service.
The fight was on, and according to Mike Pompeo, there were no rules. After his speech, he gave CIA officers the order to figure The, quote, art of the possible, end quote. He said, quote, nothing's off limits. Don't self censor yourself. I need operational ideas from you.
I'll worry about the lawyers in Washington, end quote. On April 2, 2019, President Lenin Moreno announced Assange was no longer welcome at the embassy. Assange had very little time to prepare when 9 days later, the Ecuadorian government invited British police Into the embassy to arrest Assange on the basis of skipping bail, that very same day, Assange was found guilty and sentenced 50 weeks in prison starting May 1st. The US's time had come. Assange had been secretly indicted over a year earlier in March 2018.
And on the Same day he was arrested in London, the indictment was unsealed. He was charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. A month later, while serving his sentence In the Belle Marsh prison, the US added 17 charges to the list. The maximum sentence, a 170 years in prison. A harder and 70 years for the leader of an organization that wasn't all that different from other news agencies that published leaks.
At his Extradition hearing in May 2019, as such said, quote, I do not wish to surrender myself for extradition for doing journalism that has won many, many awards and protected many people, End quote. Julian Assange is currently still in Belmarsh prison at the time of recording this video. It. If he's extradited, he faces solitary confinement in a supermax prison, a 170 years in prison for someone who did the same job as most journalists out there. Where I wouldn't be surprised if he met the same fate as our friend whose first name starts with a j and last name starts with an e.
Time will tell what the future holds for the whistleblower pioneer.
@DavidSacks - David Sacks
Julian Assange should be freed. Here’s why: #FreeAssange https://t.co/BSLv9OEhvY
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, a journalist, should not be extradited to the US for publishing classified documents leaked by Chelsea Manning. Governments hide actions, but journalists expose them for public scrutiny. Punishing Assange would undermine press freedom. Leaks are necessary for holding governments accountable. Assange's actions did not harm anyone, and he has already suffered greatly. Extraditing him would be excessive. The British high court should not send him to the US.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My name is John Meersheimer, and I teach at the University of Chicago. My area of expertise is international relations. I'd like to say a few words today about the Julian Assange case. A determination will soon be made by the British high court on whether to extradite Assange to the United States where he has been indicted by the American government and will be put on trial. I am asking the court not to extradite him and instead to set him free.
I believe this is a straightforward case. Let me explain. For starters, the case involves a wide variety of classified documents that Chelsea Manning, who was a government employee, leaked to Julian Assange, a journalist who ran WikiLeaks, a famous website that publishes classified and private documents that were not supposed to see the light of day. Manning was caught and punished because she was a government employee, and she broke the law by leaking material that was classified to Assange. But Assange is a journalist, and he did not break the law, as it is commonplace for journalists to publish classified information that is passed on to them by government insiders.
If journalists in the United States were sent to jail for publishing classified material, the jails would be filled with many of America's most famous reporters from newspapers like the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal. But of course, that hardly ever happens. Simply put, newspapers publish classified material and hardly anybody ever goes to jail. Why is this the case? What is the reason for this situation?
Governments of every type, and this includes liberal democracies like the United States and Britain, sometimes go to great lengths to hide their actions or their policies from public view, which makes it almost impossible for the public to evaluate and criticize their behavior. Given that governments sometimes act foolishly, even recklessly, this is not a good situation. Thus, a rich tradition has developed over time in the United States where insiders leak information about classified policies to journalists who publicize the information so that the public can evaluate it and push back hard against misguided policies. The most famous case that illustrates this phenomenon involves the famous Pentagon Papers, which were a multi volume study of the American decision to enter the war in Vietnam in the 1964, 65 period, and then escalate it in subsequent years. Daniel Ellsberg, who was an insider and had access to classified material, leaked the papers in 1971 to the New York Times, which subsequently published them.
The story in those documents was starkly at odds with what the Johnson administration had been telling the American people about US policy in Vietnam. By most accounts at the time and certainly since then, both Ellsberg and the New York Times performed an important public service. They exposed a bankrupt policy that underpinned a war that the US could not win. Ellsberg did not go to jail despite leaking classified information, although it did appear at the time that he might be sent to jail. Certainly, nobody at the New York Times went to jail because, again, journalists don't go to jail for publishing classified information in the United States.
It is very important to remember that in the case of Julian Assange, he is not the equivalent of Ellsberg because he was not an insider who leaked the information. Chelsea Manning was the insider. Assange was the equivalent of the New York Times, and thus he should not be extradited so he can be put on trial in the United States. Unsurprisingly, government leaders do not like leaks unless they do the leaking, which they frequently do. Thus, they are powerfully inclined to punish those who do leak, and they even try on occasion to publish the to punish the journalists who publish the leaked material as is the case with Assange.
It is fair game for governments to go after leakers, but it is not acceptable for governments to go after journalists. Indeed, it would directly undermine freedom of the press, which is essential for monitoring governments and holding them accountable when they pursue misguided policies. In fact, one of the main reasons that the US government is so determined to put Assange behind bars is that he is exposed malfeasance by US policy makers. In my opinion, that is all for the good and essential for making a liberal democracy like the United States work as efficiently and wisely as possible. Two final points, First, it is important to emphasize that nobody was hurt because of the documents that Assange published.
Nobody's life was put in danger because of what he posted on WikiLeaks, and certainly, nobody was killed. For sure, the misguided actions of many US policy makers were exposed because of what Assange did. But that, in my opinion, is all for the good. 2nd, Assange has already paid a huge price for his actions. He has effectively been in prison for years.
Sending him to the United States where he is likely to be convicted and sentenced to a long jail term would be a case of cruel and unusual punishment. For all these reasons, I respectfully ask the British high court not to extradite Assange to the United States. In my opinion, that would clearly be the right decision. Thank you.
@RealPatrickWebb - Patrick Webb
BREAKING: Over 35 law professors have contacted the Department of Justice in a letter requesting the release of Julian Assange, warning that Espionage Act charges against Julian Assange 'pose an existential threat to the First Amendment.' https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/24427303-letter-from-law-professors-re-assange-prosecution
Letter from law professors re Assange prosecution
documentcloud.org
@wikileaks - WikiLeaks
Stella Assange: "This case is about whether state crimes can continue unpunished, unscrutinized - Julian's freedom is the only antidote. Julian Assange is the worlds most famous political prisoner...and the world is watching" @Stella_Assange #FreeAssange #FreeAssangeNOW https://t.co/jlgbu3QPsr
Video Transcript AI Summary
The speaker expresses gratitude for the support at Downing Street, highlighting the importance of Julian Assange's case in defending journalism and truth. They condemn the attempt to silence Assange and emphasize the need for his freedom to protect democracy and human rights. The speaker criticizes those in power for their actions against Assange and calls for his release to prevent further injustice. They stress the significance of holding governments accountable and ensuring transparency in society. The speaker urges for solidarity in the fight for Assange's freedom.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Wow. You guys are amazing. Not just the turnout this evening coming here to Downing Street, but also over the past 48 hours. It's been incredible. Every time I got to court, I was greeted by this incredible supportive crowd that was cheering us on.
And, I I told Julian all about how much support he has and also how much attention the media has given this case this time around. The world is watching. And finally, there's a realization about what this is really about, which is an attack on the truth, an attack on the public's right to know, and, a country's attempt to further their impunity and their cover ups and continue, to kill, with impunity without the threat of a media that will scrutinize them, of a public that will demand change. That cannot stand. Everything turns on the outcome of this case.
Whether states can criminalize journalism and put journalists in prison like they've been doing in the UK with an Australian citizen, a publisher who's won many, many awards for his journalism, and they've stuck him in the deepest, darkest hole of the UK prison system and threatened and the US threatens to put him in the deepest, darkest hole of the US prison system for a 175 years. Shame. Shame. Julian's imprisonment is a result of people with too much power who lost the plot, who got power thirsty, and are guilty. They know they're guilty, and they want to continue to live their their lives without any consequences for the crimes they've committed.
This case is about whether state crimes can continue unpunished, unscrutinized. Julian's freedom is the only antidote. We don't have a a decision today. Julian's life is at severe risk. Every single day he is in prison, he's a political prisoner.
He is the world's most famous political prisoner. We know what happened to the other most famous political prisoner last week. That cannot happen to Julian. It cannot be allowed to happen. The world is watching.
Julian has to be freed. Yes. Now whatever happens in the coming days, we can't know, but we can know that we will be there for Julian and be there for for our own democracy, our own future, our own ability to change policy, to change decisions, to change governments. Because if there's no scrutiny, we can't we can't be informed. We can't be able to change, make an informed decision about who we elect.
Our rights are at stake, but Julian's life is at stake. If he is extradited, he will lose his life. He will be killed. He will be killed by the country that has been plotting his assassination. And the court heard how the United States, under the previous administration, which maybe the next administration, had plotted to assassinate him, who had plotted to poison him, who had plotted to kidnap him, who had plotted to rendition him.
Shame. Shame on those who put journalists in prison. Shame on those who murder journalists. Shame on those who are afraid of the truth. That's not a society I wanna live in.
We're better than that. The UK courts are also under scrutiny. They have heard about the murder plots against my husband. They are on notice that the country that is trying to extradite him has planned to murder him. They don't deny it.
They just change the subject. The whole time we were in court, the other side somehow avoided to talk about what the what the documents Julian published revealed. They didn't talk about the war crimes. They didn't talk about the 15,000 civilian killings in Iraq that were revealed. They didn't talk about their torture and rendition fraud program.
They didn't talk about, Guantanamo Bay. They simply changed the subject. Shame. This case is brought by criminals who want to maintain their impunity, who want to avoid the courts. They are the fugitives from justice, not Julian.
Julian is justice. He is transparency. Yes. He is us. He is the public.
And as long as Julian remains in prison, we are all in prison. Yeah. And they are free. It cannot be. Free Assange.
Free Assange. Free Assange. Be there for Julian. He would be there for you. He is there for you.
He needs to be free. Free Assange.
@TuckerCarlson - Tucker Carlson
Ep. 76 As they lecture us endlessly about human rights in other countries, the Biden administration is trying to kill journalist Julian Assange for the crime of embarrassing the CIA. His wife Stella joins us from his extradition hearing. https://t.co/DetYUeaBFl
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange, who has been imprisoned for over a decade, discusses why he believes he is being held without being charged with a crime. He became famous for publishing classified documents and videos that embarrassed the US government, but the turning point was when WikiLeaks released information about CIA surveillance. Assange denies that anyone has been harmed or killed due to his publications and expresses remorse if that were the case. The UK government's role in his imprisonment is questioned, as he has not been charged with a crime in the country. His wife, Stella Assange, provides an update on his ongoing extradition hearing and emphasizes the need for a presidential pardon to protect the future of US constitutional protections. Assange's physical and psychological well-being is described as deteriorating due to his prolonged imprisonment.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Julian Assange has been locked away in one place or another for more than a decade. Julian Assange is so despised by elements within the permanent US government that at one point, CIA director Mike Pompeo discussed murdering him in the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he was seeking asylum. Mike Pompeo has never been charged for that, which is a crime. Unelected bureaucrats can't just murder people they don't like, and he probably never will be charged for the crime. Virtually, the entire ruling class in Washington is opposed to Julian Assange, and that's the reason that he has sat for years now in Belmarsh prison in London.
Keep in mind, Julian Assange has not been charged with a crime in Great Britain, and yet he's being held there. So this fall, we went to Belmarsh, and we asked Julian Assange, why do you think you're being held as the most wanted man in America without ever being charged with a real crime? Here's what he told us. We talked about why he is in prison and my first question to him was what do you think this is actually about since you haven't been accused of a crime? And he said something that really struck me and and I think having spent my life in Washington is absolutely right.
He said he first became famous when WikiLeaks published, documents and videos that the US government had kept secret from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They were gravely embarrassing to the Pentagon. But that's that wasn't the red line. The red line was several years later when WikiLeaks published information about surveillance by the CIA. And so I asked him directly, are you aware of anyone being harmed or killed on the basis of of information he published?
He said, of course not. And and he said it in a sincere way. Like, by the way, I think if people were killed because of his publishing, because of the stories that he put online, he would feel bad about it. I mean, he seems like a humane person. He went to he withheld information about CA because he didn't wanna get people hurt.
He famously published the contents of Hillary Clinton's email account. I asked him, when you published these emails, did you realize how powerful Hillary Clinton was? We had a conversation about that, and I said, looking back, you know, do you regret doing that? He goes, honestly, it was fun. You'll notice that Julian Assange was not in that clip.
That was a recap of our conversation with Julian Assange, and the reason we did that was they wouldn't allow us to interview him on camera. So not only are they holding him, they hope until he dies, in a maximum security prison, but they're also preventing him from telling his own story to the world. All of this is a crime. Every person running for president of the United States should be forced to answer the question, will you pardon Julian Assange if he ever winds up on American soil? So far, no one has been forced to answer that question.
We hope that will change. The woman you saw in the clip is Julian Assange's wife, Stella. She has been, his greatest advocate, in the free world, and she is now leading the effort to stop his extradition to the United States where he would wind up in a supermax prison, never be heard from again until he dies. She is a lawyer, a human rights activist, and we're honored to have her join us now. Stella Assange, thank you so much, for coming on.
Can you give us an update, because I know this is taking place right now, it's in progress currently, what the status of this extradition hearing is?
Speaker 1: Well, look. We've just been in court for 2 days, and this decision could be the final one. We didn't know when we were coming into it yesterday whether we would have a decision today. And if the UK decides in favor of the US, then it will put Julian on a plane to the US. I mean, that is how imminent it is.
So, really, it's it's it's a very, very high risk moment for Julian. And what happened during, these 2 days is that, the the 2 judges said that they would withhold their their decision until well, they haven't set a date, but at least a week. And so we don't know what will happen next. This it remains the case that if he loses this round, then that's it in the UK. There's no further possibility for appeal.
He can try to go to the European Court of Human Rights, but last year, only one only one extremely rare cases. Of course, we say, this is one of them. So it's really just in, extremely rare cases. Of course, we say, this is one of them. This is one where there would be irreparable harm.
And, of course, the European Court of Human Rights, should stop an extradition if if the UK fines against him, but it's not a given. So, Julian could be on US soil within a matter of weeks. That's still the case.
Speaker 0: I'm I'm confused by the role of the UK in this. As far as I understand, he's never been charged with a crime in the United Kingdom, and yet the UK government is holding him, holding a journalist without charging him. I mean, this is what we accuse Russia and Iran and North Korea of doing. Why are British politicians degrading their own system in their history on behalf of the United States government? I feel like I'm missing something here.
Speaker 1: Well, this is the, this is the default state of affairs. The the UK views itself as a lap dog. I mean, it was obvious in courts at one point. 1 of the judges asked the US, well, if if, the your argument is that if the home secretary sees that there's that the US issued this extradition request, and that it's wrong on the face of it, that she wouldn't be able to do anything. And and the US lawyers said, yeah.
That's precisely right. It's completely lopsided. The US can do whatever it wants, basically. And that was part of their arguments in court. I mean, not to get too too much into the weeds of the court proceedings, but basically what they were saying was, you have to take these statements of these prosecutors at face value.
You don't, you know, you don't wanna offend the United States or ally. You would be implying that the prosecutors were lying, and, of course, that would never be the case. So, they were trying to convince the court that that they should just take it all at face value. And, of course, inside the courtroom, it's like they're running, 2 parallel cases. I mean, we're we're running, the case the the true reality, which is that Julian's a journalist that that exposed the wrongdoing of the country that's trying to extradite him.
And the US is, you know, just trying to attack Julian with all sorts of nonsense, the UK is a willing participant. Of course, his his imprisonment is, has gone for so long. He's been, you know, in high Belmarsh high security prison for almost 5 years, but before that in the embassy in in in the Ecuadorian embassy in the heart of London. And during this time, when he was in the embassy, it was surrounded by by British police. They were spending something like 1,000,000 and 1,000,000.
I think it was £5,000,000 a year on surrounding the embassy. And he was not charged with a crime at the time. It was a it was a show of force. And of course, it was a show of force on behalf, you know, by this British police, but to show, the United States that that they were, you know, that they were they were showing their their allegiance basically. And that's how we've had this this lawlessness for over a decade to hound Julian and to kind of send a signal.
And his his imprisonment in Balmarsh, you know, is is part of a game that they play, that the US says, well, the UK is keeping him. It's not really us. He's not in the u on US soil. And the UK goes, well, it's not really us because this is a US extradition request, and he's been there for almost 5 years. And so they play this game, and they, you know, he he he he's no one's responsibility.
And it it's just it's a game that they've been playing for years years.
Speaker 0: Does it I I know you live there, but you follow American politics. Was it surprising to you that Mike Pompeo, the neocon former CIA director who plotted to murder your husband, who'd not been charged with anything in the US at that point, that he was allowed to continue to be prominent in the United States. He ran for president, after that, and no one in the American media have said anything about it, really, with a few exceptions, But no one no one even mentioned that. You tried to murder your husband. What did you think of that?
Speaker 1: Well, I think the CIA is a is a rogue organization that everyone on every level of the US politics is is terrified of. That's true. And they are trained to assassinate. They are trained to to fabricate information and place it in the media and conduct propaganda warfare and to overthrow, you know, governments and so on. And, you know, not just abroad, it seems that there a credible, case that that they've done so domestically too.
I mean, looking at this objectively, you think, well, what on earth is this? You know, there's a whole spiel about about, you know, the US democracy and so on. And the CIA is is an agency that has, you know, caused all sorts of trouble for many countries around the world. But also, domestically, they are a force for destabilization and compromise. And, you know, Mike Pompeo's ability to, you know, move around Washington without consequence, I don't think is because of his his, I don't know, attractiveness to to the Washington circles, but rather, he's seen as a dangerous person.
But, you know, he tried to run for president, and that didn't go very well. And he wrote a book and no one bought it except for his pack or whatever. So there's that. But, yeah, he he's a dangerous individual. And even within the CIA I mean, we know the story about Julian and the and the murder plot because people within his organization said that he had lost the plot, that that he had become obsessed with Julian, that he wanted to kill that means that there was, you know, internal internal disagreement about about his his obsession.
And that's a that's a sign of hope, of course, within these organizations. There's always, you know, different types of people with with different levels of integrity and and commitment to the constitution and so on. And, the fact that many of them then spoke to these investigative journalists and exposed the crazy Pompeo murder plot is, you know, commendable, and and I'm I'm personally very, very thankful to them that they said something, not not, not just because of, the fact that it it we've been able to introduce it in court, but because, it shows that that it goes against, you know, very basic rules of of integrity and, that that this obsession with Julian that Pompeo had is part of, like, a serious collapse even within the CIA that occurred during this time.
Speaker 0: Yeah. He is a dangerous person. He should be in prison, and it's just striking that so few journalists ask him about that. None, so far as I know. So tell me if your husband is extradited to the United States, what do you think there's any chance he'll receive a presidential pardon?
Speaker 1: Any any president who looks at this case and understands how it is a danger to the the future of the US, not just the constitution, but the political culture that there has been in the United States that has been built on openness and a vibrant culture of opposition to centralized power.
Speaker 0: Yes.
Speaker 1: All of that will go out the window with this case. So any president who actually values these traditional constitutional protections should free Julian in whatever in whatever form that takes. If it's a pardon, then, you know, I welcome it. I frankly I don't care how he's freed. He just needs to be freed.
The the corruption and the lawlessness around Julian's case, it's politically motivated. It's it's rotten to the core. All of that is self evident. And whatever happens, as long as Julian's free, you know, everything else is secondary as far as I'm concerned.
Speaker 0: And and my last question, how is he doing to the extent you can characterize it physically and psychologically?
Speaker 1: Well, he's not doing well. He wasn't even attending these hearings, and and this is, you know, the decisive hearing for Julian. As I said, if he if he loses this round, and we don't know yet if he's lost, then he'll be put on a plane to the United States, unless we can prevent it some some other way. But he wasn't even attending, not even in person, not even over video link. He was able to call his lawyers during the hearing, so he was following what was happening in court.
But if he hadn't been kept in Belmarsh high security prison during the past 5 years, he wouldn't be in this state of of deterioration and decline. He would have, of course, have attended his own hearing, especially one like this. And I think it's it's should be a wake up call, that Julian's life is at risk, that every day he spends in prison is a day that his health deteriorates. I mean, 5 years inside that prison, many people don't survive it. There have been many people in Belmarsh who have committed suicide during this time, including a friend of Julian's who was, also inside the whom he met in the prison and and who who became a friend.
And, you know, it's it's a harsh environment, and he's under enormous pressure. And he he's he knows that the United States, is the country that's plotted his assassination. So, like, the stakes the stakes could not be higher, but he knows there's a lot of support out there. He knows I'm doing this interview with Tucker, and, he knows there's a lot of support. So that is also something that keeps him afloat.
He's a fighter. And I think, you know, I think the world's waking up. I've seen a lot of support, actually. I've seen a lot of attention this time around. The press is, I think, starting to realize what the implications are, and how how serious this is.
And that it's not just about Julian, that it's actually threatening the press's ability to do its job in a very, very, real way, especially the press that does the most important work, the one that makes those in power, feel uncomfortable and worried about their future careers and and freedom.
Speaker 0: Yeah. Not many of those left, but but some. Stella Sanches, thank you so much for taking this time, and godspeed.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Tucker.
Speaker 0: Thank you. Free speech is bigger than any one person or any one organization. Societies are defined by what they will not commit. What we're watching is the total inversion of virtue.
reSee.it AI Summary
The Biden administration is proceeding with the extradition case against Julian Assange, despite Australia's request to end it. The US provided assurances against the death penalty but only vaguely addressed Assange's free speech rights. The CIA director has filed a State Secrets Privilege demand to withhold information in a lawsuit against the agency by journalists and attorneys who were spied on during visits to Assange. This shows the US government's efforts to silence Assange and hide its own criminality.
@caitoz - Caitlin Johnstone
So they're really doing it. The Biden administration is really ignoring Australia's request to end the case against Julian Assange, and they're proceeding with their campaign to extradite a journalist for telling the truth about US war crimes. In order to move the extradition case forward, per a British high court ruling US prosecutors needed to provide "assurances" that the US would not seek the death penalty and would not deprive Assange of his human right to free speech because of his nationality. The US provided the assurance against the death penalty (which they'd previously opposed doing), and for the free speech assurance they said only that Assange will be able to "raise and seek to rely upon" US First Amendment rights, adding, “A decision as to the applicability of the First Amendment is exclusively within the purview of the U.S. Courts.” Which is basically just saying "I mean, you're welcome to TRY to have free speech protections?" They're just squeezing and squeezing this man as hard as they can for as long as they can get away with to keep him silent and make an example of him to show what happens when journalists reveal unauthorized information about the empire. Just like Gaza, the persecution of Julian Assange makes a lie of everything the US and its western allies claim to stand for, and reveals the cruel face of tyranny beneath the mask of liberal democracy.
@caitoz - Caitlin Johnstone
@kgosztola - Kevin Gosztola
US government submits "assurances" to the British High Court for Julian Assange's extradition and effectively rejects Australia's call to end the case against the WikiLeaks founder https://thedissenter.org/us-government-rejects-australias-call-to-end-assange-case/
US Rejects Australia's Call To End Assange Case
Rather than drop the charges or seek a plea deal, the U.S. government will keep fighting to put the WikiLeaks founder on trial.
thedissenter.org
@caitoz - Caitlin Johnstone
Assange Extradition Case Moves Forward While The CIA Covers Its Tracks Article with supporting links: https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/assange-extradition-case-moves-forward
Assange Extradition Case Moves Forward While The CIA Covers Its Tracks
Listen to a reading of this article (reading by Tim Foley): So they’re really doing it. The Biden administration is really ignoring Australia’s request to end the case against Julian Assange, and they’re proceeding with their campaign to extradite a journalist for telling the truth about US war crimes.
caitlinjohnst.one
@Real_Politik101 - Mearsheimer Fan
Professor Mearsheimer makes his case why Julian Assange should not be extradited to the U.S and be pardoned. Something worth seeing before his final appeal on July 9. Incredibly rare for him to discuss a public statement on non-geopolitical issue https://t.co/QgNEF7hzNh
Video Transcript AI Summary
My name is John Meersheimer, a University of Chicago professor of international relations. I urge the British high court not to extradite Julian Assange to the US. Assange, a journalist, published leaked classified documents from Chelsea Manning. Journalists often publish such information to hold governments accountable. Punishing Assange would hinder press freedom. His actions did not harm anyone, and he has already suffered greatly. Extraditing him would be excessive. I believe keeping him free is the right choice. Thank you.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: My name is John Meersheimer, and I teach at the University of Chicago. My area of expertise is international relations. I'd like to say a few words today about the Julian Assange case. A determination will soon be made by the British high court on whether to extradite Assange to the United States where he has been indicted by the American government and will be put on trial. I am asking the court not to extradite him and instead to set him free.
I believe this is a straightforward case. Let me explain. For starters, the case involves a wide variety of classified documents that Chelsea Manning, who was a government employee, leaked to Julian Assange, a journalist who ran WikiLeaks, a famous website that publishes classified and private documents that were not supposed to see the light of day. Manning was caught and punished because she was a government employee, and she broke the law by leaking material that was classified to Assange. But Assange is a journalist, and he did not break the law, as it is commonplace for journalists to publish classified information that is passed on to them by government insiders.
If journalists in the United States were sent to jail for publishing classified material, the jails would be filled with many of America's most famous reporters from newspapers like the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal. But of course, that hardly ever happens. Simply put, newspapers publish classified material and hardly anybody ever goes to jail. Why is this the case? What is the reason for this situation?
Governments of every type, and this includes liberal democracies like the United States and Britain, sometimes go to great lengths to hide their actions or their policies from public view, which makes it almost impossible for the public to evaluate and criticize their behavior. Given that governments sometimes act foolishly, even recklessly, this is not a good situation. Thus, a rich tradition has developed over time in the United States where insiders leak information about classified policies to journalists who publicize the information so that the public can evaluate it and push back hard against misguided policies. The most famous case that illustrates this phenomenon involves the famous Pentagon Papers, which were a multi volume study of the American decision to enter the war in Vietnam in the 1964, 65 period, and then escalate it in subsequent years. Daniel Ellsberg, who was an insider and had access to classified material, leaked the papers in 1971 to the New York Times, which subsequently published them.
The story in those documents was starkly at odds with what the Johnson administration had been telling the American people about US policy in Vietnam. By most accounts at the time and certainly since then, both Ellsberg and the New York Times performed an important public service. They exposed a bankrupt policy that underpinned a war that the US could not win. Ellsberg did not go to jail despite leaking classified information, although it did appear at the time that he might be sent to jail. Certainly, nobody at the New York Times went to jail because, again, journalists don't go to jail for publishing classified information in the United States.
It is very important to remember that in the case of Julian Assange, he is not the equivalent of Ellsberg because he was not an insider who leaked the information. Chelsea Manning was the insider. Assange was the equivalent of the New York Times, and thus he should not be extradited so he can be put on trial in the United States. Unsurprisingly, government leaders do not like leaks unless they do the leaking, which they frequently do. Thus, they are powerfully inclined to punish those who do leak, and they even try on occasion to publish the to punish the journalists who publish the leaked material as is the case with Assange.
It is fair game for governments to go after leakers, but it is not acceptable for governments to go after journalists. Indeed, it would directly undermine freedom of the press, which is essential for monitoring governments and holding them accountable when they pursue misguided policies. In fact, one of the main reasons that the US government is so determined to put Assange behind bars is that he is exposed malfeasance by US policy makers. In my opinion, that is all for the good and essential for making a liberal democracy like the United States work as efficiently and wisely as possible. Two final points, First, it is important to emphasize that nobody was hurt because of the documents that Assange published.
Nobody's life was put in danger because of what he posted on WikiLeaks, and certainly, nobody was killed. For sure, the misguided actions of many US policy makers were exposed because of what Assange did. But that, in my opinion, is all for the good. 2nd, Assange has already paid a huge price for his actions. He has effectively been in prison for years.
Sending him to the United States where he is likely to be convicted and sentenced to a long jail term would be a case of cruel and unusual punishment. For all these reasons, I respectfully ask the British high court not to extradite Assange to the United States. In my opinion, that would clearly be the right decision. Thank you.
reSee.it AI Summary
Tucker Carlson exposes the CIA's plan to murder Julian Assange and reveals that the CIA director threatened him for exposing their involvement in the murder of a US president. Mike Pompeo, who pressed Trump to keep the documents secret, is implicated in the sinister plot. Pompeo was accused by his own employees of plotting to kill Assange, who has never been charged with a crime in the US. This behavior is deemed criminal and raises concerns about Pompeo's character.
@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes
Now That Julian Assange Has Been Freed It’s Very Important To Share This Clip Again, Julian Needs To Be Careful 🚨 Tucker Carlson exposes The CIA was planning on murdering Julian Assange Tucker also reveals that the Director of The CIA threatened him & said it was a crime to expose The CIA murdered a sitting United States President “Committed a crime. He's threatening me. He's in my car. I'll never with my dog sitting next to him, I'll never forget this. And I said, are you really saying that to reveal that the US government had a role in the murder of a democratically elected president, to say that out loud, that's the crime? What about the actual crime, which is murdering a president? Like, you're covering up for that, Mike Pompeo. He had no no response at all. And so Mike Pompeo is the one who pressed Trump to keep those documents secret. And so it's like, what's crazy to me is not just that Pompeo did that. I think Pompeo is a really sinister person and a and a criminal. I think that. I think that because the facts suggest that he was caught. Yahoo News, Mike Isikoff wrote a long piece on this several years ago. His employees went to Mike Isikoff and said, hey. Mike Pompeo was plotting to murder Julian Assange who's never even been charged with a crime in the United States as CIA director. That's illegal. You're not allowed. Federal employees are not allowed to just kill people they don't like. Okay. Just just set the baseline here. So that's who Mike Pompeo is. But he somehow intimidated Trump into not releasing this. Well, okay. That's all bad. Right, I think it's criminal behavior.”
Video Transcript AI Summary
A person accuses Mike Pompeo of covering up the US government's role in a president's murder. Pompeo allegedly pressured Trump to keep documents secret. Pompeo's employees claimed he planned to kill Julian Assange as CIA director. The speaker believes Pompeo is a criminal for these actions.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Committed a crime. He's threatening me. He's in my car. I'll never with my dog sitting next, I'll never forget this. And I said, are you really saying that to reveal that the US government had a role in the murder of a democratically elected president to say that out loud, that's the crime?
What about the actual crime, which is murdering a president? Like, you're covering up for that, Mike Pompeo. He had no no response at all. And so Mike Pompeo is the one who pressed Trump to keep those documents secret. And so it's like, what's crazy to me is not just that Pompeo did that.
I think Pompeo is a really sinister person and a and a criminal. I think that. I think that because the facts suggest that he was caught. Yahoo News, Micah Isikoff wrote a long piece on this several years ago. His employees went to Mike Isikoff and said, hey.
Mike Pompeo was plotting to murder Julian Assange who's never even been charged with a crime in the United States as CIA director. That's illegal. You're not allowed. Federal employees are not allowed to just kill people they don't like. Okay?
Just just set the baseline here. So that's who Mike Pompeo is. But he somehow intimidated Trump into not releasing this. Well, okay. That's all bad.
Right? I think it's criminal behavior.
@ActiveMeasures8 - ACTIVE MEASURES
How British Intelligence Framed Julian Assange as Russian Agent British intelligence deployed a secret cabal of media assets to frame WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange as an agent of the Russian Federation. https://t.co/UXFBBCQLvQ
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange is finally free after years of persecution, having been held in London's Belmarsh prison. A campaign of misinformation, particularly from Western media, aimed to dehumanize him and undermine public support. Assange was falsely portrayed as a Kremlin agent, especially after his arrest in 2019, despite a lack of evidence. The Integrity Initiative, a covert British intelligence operation, played a significant role in spreading this narrative, particularly in Spain, where it connected Assange to Russian influence during the Catalan independence referendum. This campaign included disinformation tactics that led to his isolation and eventual removal from the Ecuadorian embassy, resulting in his ongoing suffering. The ease with which intelligence agencies manipulate media narratives highlights the dangers of uncritical journalism.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is now free at last after a decade and a half of torture and persecution. Many may have forgotten that he was incarcerated in London's Belmarsh prison, Britain's Gitmo. Such is the public conspiracy of silence and apathy fomented by a concerted campaign of calumny, incubated in London and Washington DC, designed to extinguish public sympathy for Julian. As Niles Melzer, then United Nations special rapporteur on torture, wrote in a June 2019 op ed Western news outlets refused to publish, Julian was systematically slandered to divert attention from the crimes he exposed. And once he'd been dehumanized through isolation, ridicule, and shame, just like the witches we used to burn at the stake, it was easy to deprive him of his most fundamental rights without promote provoking public outrage worldwide.
A prominent libel against Julian for many years was that he operated upon the orders and in the interests of the Kremlin. When British police forcibly hauled Julian handcuffed out of the Ecuadorian embassy, many mainstream outlets cheered, believing he would soon be indicted for his GRU assisted role in subverting the outcome of the 2016 US presidential election. No such charges were ever forthcoming. And in September 2021, Yahoo News inadvertently let an incongruous cat out of the bag. The outlet revealed the CIA had explored plans to surveil, kidnap, and even kill Julian while he was ensconced in the Ecuadorian embassy.
Along the way, Yahoo noted that the CIA possessed no evidence Julian or WikiLeaks had any ties whatsoever with Russia. Difficulty improving he or his organization had operated at the direct behest of the Kremlin was reportedly a major factor when in April 2017, Mike Pompeo, then CIA director, designated WikiLeaks a non state hostile intelligence service. That unfounded assertion opened the floodgates for the agency's untrammeled surveillance, harassment, and persecution of Julian and his collaborators. It also served as justification for its assassination plot. There is another dimension to this mephitic myth that has largely remained unexplored.
Integrity initiative, a covert British intelligence information warfare operation was pivotal to perpetuating the narrative of Julian as Kremlin asset. This sordid tale reveals just how flimsy Western propaganda campaigns are concocted and then disseminated via compliant media. The world over, integrity initiative constructed clusters, clandestine networks of journalists, scholars, politicians, and military and intelligence operatives which the initiative could mobilize to disseminate black propaganda, therefore influencing policy and perceptions targeting domestic and overseas adversaries. One little known example of the potency of clusters was an aggressive campaign to falsely connect Julian with the Kremlin. The initiative Spanish cluster was particularly instrumental in this regard.
Its ranks include a number of prominent Spanish journalists, academics, think tank representatives, lawmakers from several parties, government ministers, and military officials. Leaked initiative documents detail how this nexus successfully subverted the Spanish political process. In June 2018, Pedro Banos, a colonel in the Spanish army and formerly chief of counterintelligence and security for the European Army Corps, was to become director of Spain's National Security Department. Banos had repeatedly appeared on RT and Sputnik in the months prior and publicly called for constructive harmonious relations between the European Union and Moscow. The initiative couldn't tolerate his appointment to such an influential post.
Within hours of learning this confidential information, the initiative's Spanish cluster covertly passed dossiers on Banos, looked to local and international media outlets, and activated its overseas clusters to publish negative comments about the proposed move on social media, therefore generating international support for its blockage. The initiative's London based team also set up a dedicated WhatsApp group to coordinate Twitter response, get contacts to expand awareness and get people retweeting the material. The cluster moreover sent dossiers of damaging information on Banos to leading Spanish newspapers including El Pais. As the day drew to a close it was confirmed Banos was no longer in the running for the position. Conducting destabilizing information warfare operations in Spain hadn't always been so easy for the integrity initiative.
An internal file, why is it so difficult to address the Russia issue in Spain and what should be done, spells out in some detail the issues the organization hitherto encountered in this regard. Most among these, Moscow wasn't perceived as a problem affecting Spain's national security, not least because the two countries have no history of conflict that could be exploited to terrify and rile the Spanish public. Pro Russian narratives were said to often pervade at all levels of Spanish society. Citizens and officials alike widely believed Moscow was humiliated in the 19 nineties when western powers break clear agreements on new NATO expansion and that Russia has a natural right to a sphere of regional influence. Overwhelmingly, Russia was seen in Spain as a potential source of investment, tourism, and business opportunities rather than a hostile adversary.
And politicians, journalists, diplomats, and citizens were moreover keen to pursue dialogue with Moscow to explore ways to restore Europe's relationship with the Kremlin with a tougher line from the EU or NATO on Russia mostly seen as counterproductive or even dangerous. Quite an insurmountable state of affairs until Julian's public commentary on the Catalonian independence vote in 2017. This handed the initiative all the ammunition it needed to boggiously present Moscow as a grave threat to Spanish democracy and territorial integrity while simultaneously reinforcing the spook concocted charge that the WikiLeaks founder was a Russian operative. The autonomous Spanish region of Catalonia held a referendum on independence on October 1, 2017. Madrid declared the vote illegal and in the weeks leading up to polling day, police cracked down on numerous large scale protests.
Photos and videos of these tumultuous scenes spread widely on social media. Many civic organizations and high profile figures disseminated news of these protests and police actions. Among this strong was Julian Assange. His Twitter post attracted thousands of retweets worldwide and were referenced in a number of RT and Sputnik reports on the events fold unfolding in Barcelona. As the time came for citizens to go to the polls, former Spanish prime minister Felipe Gonzalez asked Grupo Praiza, Spain's most powerful media conglomerate and owner of El Pais, the country's 2nd largest newspaper, serious of the situation.
El Pais duly began publishing extremely critical articles on the Catalonian situation on a daily basis. Among other things, these reports inferred the independence movement was somehow directed, financed, or influenced by Russia and that Spain more generally was subject to a dastardly Kremlin interference campaign via bots and trolls on social media and fake news at the very head of which Julian sat. Subsequently, the organization circulated a major study on Russian influence in the Catalan referendum process privately to key influences in Spain including the prime minister's office and throughout Europe on the integrity initiative network. An integrity initiative briefing note framing Russian meddling in the Catalan question offered insights, background information, and suggestions to contextualize and interpret papers headline allegations were markedly bold. The the initiative claimed Russia had activated its propaganda apparatus, including Julian and Edward Snowden, to contribute to destabilizing Spain.
Catalan pro independence activists who formed part of an extensive network of pawns cultivated by the Kremlin overseas may have somehow bought Assange's support. Evidence presented for these bombastic charges was nonexistent. For example, a small number of tweets posted by Julian in Catalan, which implied a decent knowledge of the independence movement's history, reportedly suggested persons unknown could have been feeding him the information. Likewise, Vladimir Putin's reference to the referendum in his speech was alleged to have insidiously confirmed some legitimacy on the vote. This was despite the Russian president vociferously backing Madrid in that oratory while declaring the unfolding crisis an internal affair of the kingdom of Spain.
The initiative inexplicably branded this banal diplomatic boilerplate a subtle indication the Kremlin was keeping a close eye on the crisis. Such paltry conspiratorial conjecture led the organization to conclude a classic control and absorption mechanism of the KGB had been deployed to support the independence movement and disrupt Spain to further Moscow's propaganda narrative about a dysfunctional weakening and almost collapsing EU. This bunkum was cited in a number of mainstream media articles including an El Pais article written by its editor David Allen Date. The fictional narrative that online support for Catalan independence was a Russian plot fronted by Julian conclusively minted, a trickle of disinformation became a deluge with El Pais leading the charge. It published stories on the topic almost every day for weeks thereafter replete with slick charts and graphics widely recycled by other news outlets.
All that hubbub combined with the initiatives dodgy dossier reaching the deaths of high ranking politicians in Madrid was instrumental in Spain's defense and foreign ministers announcing in November 2017 that Russian based Twitter accounts had used social media to massively publicize the separatist cause and swing public opinion behind it in the lead up to the referendum. So it was the next month. Allan Dettet was invited to prevent his findings to the British Parliament's Digital Culture, Media, and Sport Committee, which was conducting an inquiry into fake news.
Speaker 1: Do you have evidence that Russian government is seeking to interfere with the referendum in Catalonia? The only evidence I
Speaker 2: have as a journalist is that, Russian state affiliated TVs have been openly spreading propaganda that benefits, those who want independence in Catalonia.
Speaker 1: Well, I'm I think I said more in the second answer, because then I'm interested in the relationship between the Russian government and the Russian affiliated Yeah. I mean, you're talking about Spoke Nation. Fully owned by them. Okay. Okay.
So so you would say that and you think that's sanctioned
Speaker 2: by the Russian government? Well, they are funded by the Kremlin. And as I said, they are their editor in chief is Margarita Simonian. She's a Russian journalist close to Putin. I mean, you can do research on her, who appointed her.
And, I would seriously look into Arty and Sputnik and what information they do and what they cover here in the United Kingdom about all sorts of issues, because I think it's worth seeing. And if I if I also may, like, the the state department in the United States has just requested them to register as foreign agents. Twitter has banned them from buying advertisement because they think it's propaganda, not advertisement for commercial issues. Issues.
Speaker 0: Julian has been invited to testify to the committee separately, but this was rescinded after an intervention from the foreign office. Accompanying Alendete were Francesco de Borja Lacheras, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations at Madrid office, and Myra Milosevic Khurasty, senior fellow for Russia and Eurasia at Elcano Institute. Both are members of Integrity Initiative Spanish cluster. The panel of lawmakers was, to say the least, of receptive audience. With the Catalan assembly elections mere days away, the committee thought it a particularly interesting time to discuss this issue.
Chair Damien Collins also appears to have attended an integrity initiative event convened in February 2016. The Spanish trio's assertions met no challenge or criticism as they rattled off virtually verbatim various bogus hypotheses and claims from the initiative's briefing paper. Milosevic Jurastik declared, the complexity of the combination of different instruments used during the referendum in Catalonia, including Joe Julian's social media activities, meant it was impossible there wasn't a determined Kremlin hybrid warfare strategy at work in the breakaway region. She was nonetheless forced to admit, I do not have material to justify that. Still, the Spaniards easily convinced the committee that Russian interference was so huge and oppressive that he could not move for it.
The parliamentarians asked whether Moscow had sought to interfere with the referendum's outcome or if there was any other specific objective in Arty and Sputnik's coverage of the violent scenes that unfolded in Barcelona. The witnesses were at a loss. The the sheriff repeatedly stated, we have no specific evidence, and we do not know, while Allan Dette unconvincedly contended the only evidence he could provide was that Russian state affiliated media organizations had reported on the events in the first place. While the MPs clearly weren't interested in seriously probing the integrity initiative trio's assertions, hacker and activist MC McGrath was and submitted a detailed withering assessments of the committee in response. McGrath identified numerous instances of misrepresentation of data sources use of inaccurate information lack of attention to detail and poor research methodology which resulted in exceptionally misleading conclusions being presented to the parliamentary panel.
The sheer scale of the lies distortions exaggerations misrepresentations and exceptionally poor attention to detail uncovered by Mark McGrath is quite extraordinary. For example, numerous El Pais reports alleged there was a suspiciously large number of tweets about Catalonia from Russian bots and trolls, in particular retweets of RT and Sputnik as well as Julian's personal account. McGrath's analysis of 23,418 retweets of Julian's post discussing Catalonia in September October 2017 showed just 2.1% emanated from accounts located in Russia. This was entirely in line with world population ratios and in no way indicated disproportionate interest in the situation in Catalonia from Russia. In fact, those retweeting Julian were overwhelmingly based in the US.
Even more damningly, McGrath found Julian featured in just 17 of 596 stories about Catalonia published by Arty and Sputnik from September to December 2017. Meanwhile, of the 1508 tweets shared by the pair's English and Spanish language Twitter accounts on Catalonia within this time frame, a mere 22, 1.46 percent, mentioned him. Ironically, El Pais published considerably more stories referencing Julian than Sputnik and RT combined during the same period. McGrath concluded, claims about fake news, especially those published in the media and brought before legislative bodies need to be more thoroughly scrutinized. It is important to conduct further research to understand how widespread of an issue fake news about fake news is and how these unfounded allegations come about.
It is necessary to explore how claims of fake news can themselves be used as a manipulative tactic and understand the impact this has on society. Despite this savage indictment of the trio's credibility, the committee appeared unmoved, issuing an interim report in July 2018 quoting them at some length. It stated unequivocally, during the referendum campaign, Russia provoked conflict through a mixture of misleading information and disinformation between people within Spain and between Spain and other member states in the EU and in NATO. Even more significantly, in March that year, the initiative manufactured controversy led to Ecuador cutting off Julian's Internet access and preventing him from receiving any visitors other than his lawyers. It was argued that his social media activities put at risk the good relations Ecuador maintains with the UK, with the other states of the European Union, and with other nations.
As Glenn Greenwald documented at the time, this resulted from serious diplomatic pressure being applied to Ecuadorian president Lenin Moreno from the Spanish government in Madrid and its NATO allies. The escalation of tensions with Spain which has diplomatic ties to Ecuador threatens Assange's asylum in a way that the long standing pressure from the US and UK could not. Ecuador is being forced to choose between maintaining their relations with other states and upholding Assange's asylum. That same month, foreign minister Alan Duncan had a one to one meeting with then prime minister Theresa May in which he was instructed to butter up Moreno and facilitate Julian's removal from the embassy. This precipitated a year of diplomatic schmoozing including state funded trips to London for high ranking the Ecuadorian officials and visits in the opposite direction by British security and intelligence figures.
A month after Julian's dramatic arrest in April 2019, trade minister George Holmgerry flew to Quito to sign London's Andean Countries trade agreement. Recall the words of Niall Smelzer on how Julian was systematically slammed to divert attention from the crimes he exposed and how once he'd been dehumanized through isolation, ridicule, and shame, it was easy to deprive him of his most fundamental rights without provoking public outrage worldwide. The initiative actions went an enormous way to isolating Julian, severely curtailing his already limited access to the outside world, laying the foundations for his removal from the embassy and resulting in incarceration and consigning him to daily misery and physical and psychological torture. This egregious saga is a particularly pitiful example of the ease with which Western intelligence agencies can flood corporate media with outright fiction on the flimsiest of bases. In the knowledge credulous, pliable journalists will peddle their fallacious lies as fact in the manner of religious conviction and never face consequences.
If and when their lies are exposed, they can pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing happened, safely clinging to their legitimizing awards, sanitize Wikipedia entries, and plaudits.
reSee.it AI Summary
In my first public hearing since my release, I revealed shocking details about the CIA's attempts to assassinate me while I was in the Ecuadorian embassy. They sought to obtain DNA from my infant son and had an asset tracking my wife. Under CIA Director Pompeo, plans were made to kidnap and harm me and my colleagues, involving hacking and misinformation. This information comes from over thirty current and former US intelligence officials and is supported by evidence from a prosecution against CIA agents. This situation highlights the aggressive tactics of powerful intelligence organizations.
@Ultrafrog17 - Green Lives Matter
NEW: Julian Assange just exposed the CIA in his first public hearing since his release. He says that they tried to assassinate him within the embassy, tried to attain DNA from his sixth-month-old son, had a CIA asset permanently track his wife, and attempted to hack and plant false information. 👀 "We revealed the CIA's vast production of malware and viruses, it's subversion of supply chains...CIA Director Pompeo launched a campaign of retribution… It is now a matter of public record that under Pompeo's explicit direction, the CIA drew up plans to kidnap and to assassinate me within the Ecuadorian embassy in London and authorize going after my European colleagues, subjecting us to theft, hacking attacks, and the planting of false information. My wife and my infant son were also targeted. A CIA asset…was permanently assigned to track my wife, and instructions were given to obtain DNA from my six month old son's Nappy… This is the testimony of more than thirty current and former US intelligence officials speaking to the US press, which has been additionally corroborated by record seized in a prosecution bought against some of the CIA agents involved… The CIA's targeting of myself my family, and my associates through aggressive extrajudicial and extraterritorial means provides a rare insight into how powerful intelligence organizations engage in transnational repression. Such repressions are not unique. What is unique is that we know so much about this one due to numerous whistleblowers and to judicial investigations in Spain."
@FreyjaTarte - Freyja™
Julian Assange outs Mike Pompeo and the CIA. This is huge. https://t.co/JWjZ0wb5zc
Video Transcript AI Summary
Under Director Pompeo, the CIA allegedly planned to kidnap and assassinate the speaker within the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The CIA is also accused of targeting the speaker's European colleagues with theft, hacking attacks, and disinformation.
The speaker's wife and infant son were allegedly targeted as well, with a CIA asset assigned to track the wife and instructions given to obtain DNA from the six-month-old son's nappy. These claims are based on testimony from over 30 current and former US intelligence officials and corroborated by records seized in a prosecution against CIA agents in Spain.
The speaker claims this targeting provides insight into transnational repression by powerful intelligence organizations. The speaker asserts the uniqueness of this case lies in the extensive knowledge available due to whistleblowers and judicial investigations in Spain.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: CIA director Pompeo launched a campaign of retribution. It is now a matter of public record that under Pompeo's explicit direction, the CIA drew up plans to kidnap and to assassinate me within the Ecuadorian Embassy in London and authorized going after my European colleagues subjecting us to theft, hacking attacks, and the planting of false information. My wife and my infant son were also targeted. A CIA asset was permanently assigned to track my wife and instructions were given to obtain DNA from my 6 month old son's nappy. This is the testimony of more than 30 current and former US intelligence officials speaking to the US press which has been additionally corroborated by record seized in a prosecution bought against some of the CIA agents involved.
The CIA is targeting of myself, my family, and my associates through aggressive extrajudicial and extraterritorial means provides a rare insight into how powerful intelligence organizations engage in transnational repression. Such repressions are not unique. What is unique is that we know so much about this one due to numerous whistleblowers and to judicial investigations in Spain.
@wikileaks - WikiLeaks
Breaking: The Council of Europe's Parliamentary Assembly has voted to confirm that Julian Assange was held as a political prisoner. https://t.co/UkHdmD1aI5
@C__Herridge - Catherine Herridge
Tomorrow a CIA Whistleblower comes forward… https://t.co/ATxoguNoe9
@WallStreetApes - Wall Street Apes
BREAKING Elon Musk just said he will inquire about a pardon for Edward Snowden Tucker Carlson exposed right before Julian Assange was freed that The CIA under the Biden Admin was still currently trying to murder Snowden Journalists will no longer be hunted down under Trump! https://t.co/l5FHoLAB9B
Video Transcript AI Summary
Julian Assange and Ed Snowden both exemplify bravery and a commitment to their principles, enduring significant personal sacrifices. Assange is currently imprisoned, while Snowden lives in exile. Their actions highlight the importance of individual dignity and self-respect, rejecting any form of oppression or deceit. Assange, a journalist, likely never anticipated a life behind bars, while Snowden fully understood the risks he faced. He chose to jeopardize his comfortable life to expose government actions to the American public. It’s alarming that, despite the threats against Snowden, news organizations fail to defend him, revealing the fraudulent nature of the news industry.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Julian Assange and Ed Snowden. I know them both. There was attempted murders on both of them. Yes. Both are alive.
Julian is kinda rotting in a cell right now, I believe. And Yes. And Ed is in his own exile in Rust. Yes. How do you feel about about those 2?
Speaker 1: Their bravery, their physical courage, those guys, their willingness to suffer for what they believe, and the principles for which they're suffering. You know, the dignity of the individual. We're all created by God. You cannot treat me like a slave. You cannot tell me what to think.
You cannot tell me what to say. You cannot lie to my face. Period. Because I have self respect.
Speaker 0: And if there is a field of value, this is right,
Speaker 1: this is wrong. That's exactly right. Going on was wrong. Well, and Snowden, especially. I mean, Snowden, you know, Assange is Australian.
He's lived around the world. He was a journalist. I don't think he had any expectation that he would wind up spending his adult life in prison. I don't think that even crossed his mind. Maybe it did.
I haven't asked him. Ed Snowden knew exactly what he was getting into. Yeah. And he was a middle class American, high IQ guy, lots of job opportunities here. He could've lived a very comfortable life with his wife and kids, and he intentionally put all of that at risk in order to tell Americans what their government was actually doing.
And what's crazy to me is not that the US government is trying to murder him, which of course they are, but that news organizations don't defend him. That's when you realize, quote, news business is totally fraudulent.
@joeroganhq - Joe Rogan Podcast News
Tucker Carlson and Joe Rogan on Julian Assange. https://t.co/4PCQPN7YHC
Video Transcript AI Summary
Speaker discusses Trump’s stance on JFK assassination files, saying Trump claimed that if you knew what I know, you wouldn’t tell people either, and notes that this is his position on UAP as well. He asserts that the CIA had knowledge of the JFK matter and that the conspiracy industry around JFK is an industry with many wackos, but emphasizes that the facts themselves tell an unbelievable story. He mentions that documents are still classified sixty-one years later and argues that both Trump and Joe Biden have kept those documents secret in violation of his reading of federal law. He states there is no living person connected to the Kennedy assassination, only an institution or possibly countries involved, and indicates there may be something worth protecting.
He relays a conversation with someone who had seen the documents two years earlier, from whom he learned that yes, the CIA was involved, and notes James Jesus Angleton, head of the operations directorate, had knowledge of this. He says this was news to him and he discussed it on TV. The next day, while quail hunting, he received a phone call from Mike Pompeo’s lawyer, who, as then-CIA director and later Secretary of State, had plotted the murder of Julian Assange. The lawyer told him that anyone who reveals contents of classified documents has committed a crime, and the speaker recalls driving with his dog and asks if revealing that the U.S. government had a role in the murder of a democratically elected president constitutes the crime, while suggesting Pompeo is protecting the murder. The speaker says Pompeo had no response.
The speaker asserts Pompeo pressed Trump to keep the documents secret and calls Pompeo sinister and criminal, citing that Pompeo was caught—referencing Yahoo News, Mike Issachoff’s piece—where Issachoff’s sources claimed Pompeo was plotting to murder Julian Assange, who had not been charged in the U.S. as CIA director. He states federal employees are not allowed to kill people they don’t like. He contends Pompeo pressured Trump to withhold information the public has a right to know and that Pompeo plotted the murder of someone who committed no crime.
Finally, the speaker questions how Pompeo is treated in Republican Washington, noting he is treated as a respected figure and potential secretary of defense in a Trump administration, despite being described as criminal for keeping information secret and for plotting a murder. He finds it mind-bending that Pompeo is treated as a pillar of Republican Washington.
Full Transcript
Speaker 0: Did you hear Trump's take on the JFK assassination, why he didn't release the files? Yeah. I know what Trump's take is. He said that if you knew what I know, you wouldn't tell people either, which is crazy. Well, and What does that mean?
That's his position on the UAP thing as well Yeah. Actually. And that's a lot of people's position on it. I mean, you know, Trump is saying, of course, the CIA had knowledge of it. That is known.
I mean, I mean, the whole it sounds like it's so funny. There's so many levels and there's so much I don't understand. But the whole JFK conspiracy industry, and it really is an industry, more books written on that than almost any historical topic, is is filled with wackos. Right? There are a lot of wackos in there.
But it obscures that fact obscures the larger fact which is the facts themselves tell an unbelievable story. Yeah. And so whatever. I could get into it at great length. But yeah.
Yeah. They're they're still classifying documents sixty one years later. Both Trump and Joe Biden have, in violation of my read of federal law, kept those documents secret. There's no living person connected to the Kennedy assassination. It was a couple generations ago.
There's no one person whose whose secrets are being protected. It's an institution or maybe countries. There may have been countries involved too. I mean, don't know the answer, but there's clearly something worth protecting. And I know that when I I spoke to someone who'd seen the documents, okay, two years ago and I got I got one fact out of him, which is, yes, the CIA was involved.
And by CIA, CIA is a huge organization, but James Jesus Angleton, the head of the operations directorate, had knowledge of this, which I think is well known. But that that's the view of someone who saw the documents. So I thought that was news, so I went on TV and said that. The next day, I'll never forget it, I went quail hunting, and I was driving back and I got a phone call from Mike Pompeo's lawyer. Mike Pompeo was the secretary of state, but before then he was the director of the CIA.
And in that position, he plotted the murder of Julian Assange, so he is a criminal as far as I'm concerned. But his lawyer called me and said, you know, you should know that anyone who tells you the contents of classified documents has committed a crime. He's threatening me. He's in my car. I'll never with my dog sitting next to me.
I'll never forget this. And I said, are you really saying that to reveal that the US government had a role in the murder of a democratically elected president to say that out loud, that's the crime? What about the actual crime which is murdering a president? Like, you're covering up for that, Mike Pompeo. He had no no response at all.
And so Mike Pompeo is the one who pressed Trump to keep those documents secret. And so it's like, what's crazy to me is not just that Pompeo did that. I think Pompeo was a really sinister person and a and a criminal. I think that. I think that because the facts suggest that.
He was caught. Yahoo News, Mike Issachoff wrote a long piece on this several years ago. His employees went to Mike Issachoff and said, hey. Mike Pompeo was plotting to murder Julian Assange who's never even been charged with a crime in The United States as CIA director. That's illegal.
You're not allowed federal employees are not allowed to just kill people they don't like. Okay? Just to set the baseline here. So that's who Mike Pompeo is, but he somehow intimidated Trump into not releasing this. Well, okay.
That's all bad. Right? I think it's criminal behavior. What's crazy is how Mike Pompeo is treated. He's treated as like a republican pooh bah in good standing.
He fully expects to become the secretary of defense in a Trump administration, which is like completely insane. Why would you get criminal and give him nuclear weapons? Okay. That's my view. I think it's a common sense view.
And like he goes to fundraisers and dinners and everyone's like, hey, Mike Pompeo. It's like, no. You're the guy who kept information the public has right to know secret. You're the guy who plotted the murder of someone who committed no crime. You are the outlaw.
You are the bad guy. But no. He's treated as like, you know, like a pillar of republican Washington. I think that's I think it's mind bending to watch that.