Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 92
  1. #1
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737

  2. #2
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    DAY 2 OF THE FARCE:

    6:30 am EDT: Five minute pause as Assange spoke out in court spontaneously. Difficult to make out what he said but he seemed to be objecting to being represented by proxy and not being allowed to speak. Judge Vanessa Baraitser angrily said she had several options, but only named one: that he speak to his lawyers.

  3. #3
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,592
    DAY 2 OF THE FARCE:

    6:30 am EDT: Five minute pause as Assange spoke out in court spontaneously. Difficult to make out what he said but he seemed to be objecting to being represented by proxy and not being allowed to speak. Judge Vanessa Baraitser angrily said she had several options, but only named one: that he speak to his lawyers.

  4. #4
    Believe.
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Post Count
    1,676
    He loves America, though, remember.

    called it

  5. #5
    Against Home Schooling Ef-man's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    17,527
    What happened on day 1?

  6. #6
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    8:30 am EDT: Court is in lunch break. Morning session ended with re-direct of defense witness Smith. Consortium News is following every moment of the extradition trial via a video-link to Old Bailey.

    Prosecution had tried to establish on cross that Assange is not being charged with publishing classified information, but only publishing names of informants, which happened to be in classified do ents.

    There is no specific U.S. statute against revealing informants names, as there is regarding the names of covert government agents, as readers will recall in the Valerie Plame case. But James Lewis QC for the prosecution argued that informant names are national defense information and thus protected by the Espionage Act.

    This is a sleight of hand and speaks to the public relations nature of the U.S. case. Lewis on the one hand argues Assange is not being charged with publishing, but only with publishing do ents with informants’ names. That is an appeal to First Amendment concerns. But that is still a charge of publishing classified information, even if restricted to those with informant names.

    The U.S. appeal to the public is to depict Assange as an ogre who doesn’t care for human life, while at the same time portraying the United States as being concerned for a free press.

    Lewis read from the book by David Leigh and Luke Harding, Wikileaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy, in which the authors say that Assange was unconcerned about revealing the names of informants, and quotes from a dinner in which Assange was alleged to have said that informants deserved it, if they were killed.

    Lewis asked the defense witness Smith if he agreed with Leigh about this or with Assange? It was a below-the-belt question. Smith said there was 200 years of law to protect defendants from hearsay. Smith then returned to a point he repeatedly made that Lewis, as a British lawyer, didn’t know how U.S. trials are conducted the way Smith, an American lawyer, does.

    Smith said it doesn’t matter what’s in an indictment, because other evidence is routinely introduced at American trials.

    But Mark Summers, QC for the defense, went a step further, reading directly from the espionage indictment of Assange, which clearly shows that he is being charged on more than just the do ents containing informant names. Instead he is charged with with conspiring to “obtain do ents, writings, and notes connected with the national defense,” including “U.S. State Department cables, and Iraq rules of engagement files classified up to the SECRET level … with reason to believe that the information was to be used to the injury of the United States or the advantage of any foreign nation.”

    Lewis objected that Summers wasn’t reading it correctly, so Summers repeated by sarcastically reading it out with the punctuation marks.

  7. #7
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    arlier under direct examination from Summers, a litany of U.S. war crimes, torture and assassination programs revealed by WikiLeaks were discussed in open court in Britain, one of America’s most staunch allies. It was an extraordinary moment, with U.S. officials sitting there listening behind their British lawyers. One them, Lewis, on cross, tried to dismiss it by saying that Assange wasn’t be charged for releasing any of the do ents that revealed the crimes Smith was referring to and that they were irrelevant to the case.

    It was at that point that Assange cried out, “This is nonsense,” that the prosecution was wrong because he’s being charged for receiving and publishing all the do ents.

    Smith, who represented Guantanamo detainees, said at one point that over-classification by the U.S. was the most serious matter since 9/11 and said evidence of torture of his clients was part of this over-classification.

  8. #8
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    2:50 pm EDT: Day 2 of Assange’s substantial hearing has ended. Consortium News followed every moment of the hearing that went about 20 minutes over time via a video-link from Old Bailey.

    The prosecution tried to narrow the Espionage Act charges down to only classified do ents that mentioned the names of informants, a gambit shot down by the defense when it quoted directly from the indictment proving otherwise.

    Before the defense got the chance, Julian Assange shouted from his glass cage at the back of the court that it was “nonsense” to suggest he wasn’t being prosecuted for all the classified material he published. That brought a firm warning from Magistrate Vanessa Baraitser that he would be removed from the court if he did it again.

    The informants theme is one we can expect the government to continue harping on for the duration of this hearing, as they have very little else go on. James Lewis QC for the prosecution quoted from a book that alleges Assange said informants deserved to die, an assertion that has been denied by a German editor present. He is to testify next week.

    The other line of attack from the prosecution is that Assange “conspired” with Chelsea Manning to “hack” government a computer to obtain classified do ents. In the afternoon, the continuation of Prof. Mark Feldstein continued from Monday.

    Under direct examination Feldstein made a spirited defense of Assange’s activities as being routine for journalists. The government, he said, “paints journalistic activities in a nefarious light.” He said it is “standard to ask sources for evidence and do ents to back up what they say and working with them to find do ents, making suggestions to what they should look for. It’s all routine.”

    Feldstein also told defense attorney Mark Summers that no publisher had ever been prosecuted before for publishing, but that former presidents had tried. He told the story of Richard Nixon who wanted to prosecute columnist Jack Anderson but was told by his attorney he could not because it would violate the First Amendment.

    So Nixon then hatched plans with a former CIA agent to send a false story on White House letterhead hoping he’d publish it then be exposed, but Anderson checked it out and didn’t use it, unlike many of today’s journalists who run with government hand outs.

    So Nixon then tried to kill Anderson, but all the plots were foiled: poisoning his aspirins , trying to crash a car into him or stabbing him to make it look like a mugging. All this, but Nixon did not prosecute Anderson for publishing.

    It was chilling testimony in a British court that added to earlier testimony about U.S. war crimes.

    But on cross examination Feldstein fell apart. He allowed himself to be bullied by Lewis. It this were a prize fight, the referee would have ended it.

    Instead Lewis took advantage of his prey, asking legal questions he knew Feldstein was not equipped to handle. He badgered him about why the grand jury on Assange continued, even though Feldstein testified that the Obama administration decided not to prosecute because it would run up against the First Amendment.

    Lewis then bored into a completely flustered Feldstein about how he could call the Assange prosecution political when he could not prove an order came from the White House. But attorneys general and CIA directors can exert political pressure. Lewis also adopted a very narrow definition of politic, excluding that getting Assange was to preserve U.S. foreign policy from exposure as well as maintaining the political reputations of U.S. officials.

    When Baraitser announced that court was adjourned a broad smile lit up Feldstein’s face. His ordeal was over.

  9. #9
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737

  10. #10
    Alleged Michigander ChumpDumper's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Post Count
    144,592
    Julie lashing out

  11. #11
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737

  12. #12
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    What happened on day 1?
    Nobody knows their zoom meeting crashed


  13. #13
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    Mq nig dotcom going balls deep


  14. #14
    Against Home Schooling Ef-man's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    17,527
    Nobody knows their zoom meeting crashed



    Curse you Bill Gates!

  15. #15
    Pronouns: Your/Dad TheGreatYacht's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Post Count
    36,436
    THE "JULIAN ASSANGE" *HOAX* EXPOSED.
    MAGTRUTH


    https://www. ute.com/video/gnDVURlGEJnr/

    Spurtacular hater

  16. #16
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,146
    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54070046

    Meanwhile Germany about to kick Russian in the gonads.
    Ouch.

  17. #17
    Against Home Schooling Ef-man's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Post Count
    17,527
    TGY, Assange is ok facing death sentence.

    He requests no support from you as there is no need to add insult to injury.


  18. #18
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,146
    And in Belarus, politicians go "missing"

    https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54068451

    I wonder if Assange and Snowden are available for comment.
    Oh, they are? Wonder why they dont go "missing"

  19. #19
    Pronouns: Your/Dad TheGreatYacht's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Post Count
    36,436
    TGY, Assange is ok facing death sentence.

    He requests no support from you as there is no need to add insult to injury.

    I always found it odd that Julian Assange never exposes Zionism and Israel. That is a huge red flag.

  20. #20
    my unders, my frgn whites pgardn's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Post Count
    38,146
    I always found it odd that Julian Assange never exposes Zionism and Israel. That is a huge red flag.
    He is a very determined self promoter.
    But he is NOT, a complete nut like you.

  21. #21
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    DAY 3 OF THE FARCE:

    7:06 am EDT: On cross examination of the defense witness, Prof. Paul Rogers, political scientist at Bradford University, the prosecutor, James Lewis QC, is hammering Rogers to try to get him to admit he has no basis to testify that the prosecution of Julian Assange is politically motivated.

    Lewis is trying to destroy the witness’ credibility as an expert by saying he did not include a statement by the U.S. prosecutor stating that the charges against Assange are moved by criminal justice, and not politics.

    Rogers says he has no doubt Department of Justice officials acted professionally in putting together an indictment, but questions officials at high levels of government who gave the orders to prosecute in the first place. They have done this, Rogers testified, after eight years of failure by the Obama administration to do so, despite a desire to, and that it is the particular political anomosity of the Trump administration that brought the prosecution about.

  22. #22
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    Snowden is a respected whistle blower who is above politics. Julie became a joke once he started to take sides and became partisan.

  23. #23
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    Snowden is a respected whistle blower who is above politics. Julie became a joke once he started to take sides and became partisan.
    Journalists take sides all d time. If we gonna prosecute them for it then we are in 1984 of a brave new world ma nig

  24. #24
    4-25-20 Will Hunting's Avatar
    My Team
    Boston Celtics
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Post Count
    22,310
    Journalists take sides all d time. If we gonna prosecute them for it then we are in 1984 of a brave new world ma nig
    I'm not talking about whether Julie should be prosecuted. I'm saying he lost his credibility when he decided to help a billionaire oligarch get elected president.

  25. #25
    Veteran hater's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Post Count
    70,737
    I'm not talking about whether Julie should be prosecuted. I'm saying he lost his credibility when he decided to help a billionaire oligarch get elected president.
    Disagree with that premise. But sure you dont have to like him. His prosecution would be the end of journalism as we know it.

    Welcome to 1984

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •