Crucifixion is meant to be a slow painful death where the victim suffocates under his own weight, much like the fate of Julian Assange in a maximum-security British prison ravaged by COVID-19. There’s a lot about Assange’s case that doesn’t add up. The evidence provided by Assange and Wikileaks provided the DOJ with an airtight case against Hillary Clinton -- a major factor in getting Trump elected. But while Julian languishes in prison, Hillary is free living the good life. There’s just something fundamentally wrong with this scenario.
Where is the gratitude from Trump? He’s president, so Julian serves no practical purpose now -- there’s nothing to gain from having him around. Moreover, he knows too much to allow him to live, so while most of Belmarsh Prison has been evacuated because of the virus, Assange is forced to stay.
"The imprisonment of Julian Assange has been a catalogue of gross injustice heaped upon gross injustice, while a complicit media and indoctrinated population looks the other way. In a truly extraordinary twist, Assange is now being extradited on the basis of an indictment served in the UK, which is substantially different to the actual indictment he now faces in Virginia if extradited."
"The Assange hearing was adjourned after its first full week, and its resumption has since been delayed by coronavirus. In that first full week, both the prosecution and the defense outlined their legal arguments over the indictment. As I reported in detail to an audience of millions, Assange’s legal team fairly well demolished the key arguments of the prosecution during that hearing."
The judge in the case, Vanessa Baraitser, Britain’s equivalent of Amy Barrett-Jackson, has consistently ruled in favor of the state, despite mountains of exculpatory evidence that she almost invariably disallows. Any conceivable roadblock that can be used against the defense is allowed including numerous postponements due to the COVID-19 “Pandemic,” likely in hopes that Julian, whose health has been decimated by his internment, will catch the virus and die.
The British system of jurisprudence, hailed around the world as being “fair and impartial,” and the model for our own, has shed any pretense of fairness and transparency. It is now being used to disparage and perhaps murder a man whose crime is his dedication to the truth.
The charges in the US are all based on three accusations against Assange -- all provably false:
1) Assange helped Manning to decode a hash key to access classified material.
Summers stated this was a provably false allegation from the evidence of the Manning court-martial.
2) Assange solicited the material from Manning
Summers stated this was provably wrong from information available to the public
3) Assange knowingly put lives at risk
Summers stated this was provably wrong both from publicly available information and from specific involvement of the US government.
“In summary, Summers stated the US government knew that the allegations being made were false as to fact, and they were demonstrably made in bad faith. This was therefore an abuse of process which should lead to dismissal of the extradition request. He described the above three counts as ‘rubbish, rubbish and rubbish’”.
This says a lot about the character of both President Trump, who seems more concerned about his “ratings,” and Atty. General Bill Barr, who can easily see through this farce. Lamentably, this sends a terrible message about the state of justice in America. If charges were dismissed on the part of the DOJ, the case in the British court would fall apart.The release of the Clinton emails helped Trump win the election, swaying undecided voters who care about law and order. Yet neither Clinton, or anyone else involved in the corruption, have been indicted, only Chelsea Manning and Julian.
Julian’s lawyer, Mark Summers showed that the “hash codes” referred to in number 1, were completely unnecessary for Manning to access the information sent to Wikileaks. Nor was there any need for her to conceal her identity as the database was accessible to thousands of other soldiers. Judge Baraitser’s objection to this was ludicrous at best:
“Magistrate Baraitser twice made major interruptions. She observed that if Chelsea Manning did not know she could not be traced as the user who downloaded the databases, she might have sought Assange’s assistance to crack a code to conceal her identity from ignorance she did not need to do that, and to assist would still be an offense by Assange.” [Emphasis mine]
Since when, in a court of law, has “might have” been admissible as a standard? Courts are only supposed to allow provable facts, not hypotheses and conjectures from corrupt magistrates. Baraister’s arguments made even less sense as she refused to let go of her “might have '' scenario.
“Summers pointed out that Manning knew that she did not need a username and password, because she actually accessed all the materials without one. Baraitser replied that this did not constitute proof she knew she could not be traced. Summers said in logic it made no sense to argue that she was seeking a code to conceal her user ID and password, where there was no user ID and password. Baraitser replied again he could not prove that. At this point Summers became somewhat testy and short with Baraitser, and took her through the court martial evidence again. Of which more…”
“Baraitser also made the point that even if Assange were helping Manning to crack an admin code, even if it did not enable Manning to access any more databases, that still was unauthorized use and would constitute the crime of aiding and abetting computer misuse, even if for an innocent purpose.”
This is the judge, mind you, arguing the prosecution's case for them. Just as it is in America, justice in the UK seems to be dead as well. Where is the public outcry? It seems that Julian has become a forgotten man.
“Now while there is no evidence that judge Baraitser is giving any serious consideration to the defense case, what this has done is show the prosecutors the holes in their argument which would cause them serious problems should they get Julian to trial in the United States. In particular, they are wary of the strong freedom of speech protections in the US constitution and so are desperate to portray Julian as a hacker, and not a journalist. But, as you can see above, their case for this is not looking strong.”
Another reason that’s it’s unlikely that Julian will leave the UK alive. In the event that Assange should make it to America to face trial here, the indictment here has been changed to show that Julian “conspired with affiliated hackers.”
One sentence in the indictment is particularly odd; the one in paragraph four that refers to “...hacked materials from the CIA, NSA, or New York Times.” How exactly does one “hack” information from a newspaper? Once again, this indictment, like in the UK, contains the completely unnecessary “password hash” is mentioned. This is nothing more than a railroad job intended to silence someone for telling the truth about US war crimes. More than to prosecute Assange, this case is meant to send a message loud and clear to anyone that tells the truth about the criminal cabal that masquerades as a government “by, to and for the people.” As Dr. Ron Paul so aptly put it: “Truth is treason in an empire of lies.”
As you can see, this is about switching to charges firmly grounded in “hacking”, rather than in publishing leaks about appalling American war crimes. The new indictment is based on the evidence of a “supergrass”, Sigurdur Thordarson, who was acting as a paid informant to the FBI during his contact with WikiLeaks.
But Julian never actively hacked anything or anybody, hence the conspiracy to act with “affiliated hackers,” whatever that means. It’s obvious that a bogus case has been built against Julian both in the UK and here in the US. There are no arguments his lawyers in England can present that will satisfy the corrupt Judge Vanessa Baraister who is dragging her feet in hopes that Assange will die in Belmarsh Prison. They have done everything in their power to break him while he’s been there. Should he survive extradition, he can expect the same treatment here, or worse. Thordarson’s history is proof of that.
“Thordarson is fond of money and is a serial criminal. He was convicted on December 22, 2014 by Reykjanes District Court in Iceland of stealing over $40,000 and over 13,000 euro from WikiLeaks “Sunshine Press” accounts by forging documents in the name of Julian Assange, and given a two year jail sentence. Thordarson is also a convicted sex offender, and was convicted after being turned in to the police by Assange, who found the evidence – including of offenses involving a minor – on Thordarson’s computer.”
With a resume like that he could get a job at the FBI or run for public office as a Democrat. This is the state’s star witness against Julian -- a career criminal. This has become a hallmark of American jurisprudence of late, using career criminals to prosecute innocent people -- justice is not only blind, but stupidly corrupt as well. There’s a line in the movie Primal Fear that fits perfectly here: “If you want justice, go to a whorehouse -- if you want to get fucked, go to court.”
The introduction of this new superseding indictment comes over a year after the closing dates for such submissions, yet it has been accepted both here and in the UK. But, although accepted in the UK, it will not be argued in the extradition hearing which makes no sense. Essentially the charges being argued in the UK at the extradition hearing will not be the charges Julian will be facing if extradited to the US.
“This leaves the UK extradition in a state of absolute farce. I was involved in discussion with WikiLeaks about what would happen when the superseding indictment was introduced at the procedural hearing last month. It ought not to have been accepted – it is over a year since the closing date, and a week of opening arguments on the old indictment have already been heard. The new indictment is plainly designed to redress flaws in the old one exposed at the hearing.”
“The superseding indictment also is designed to counter defense witness affidavits which have been disclosed to the prosecution, including expert witness testimony which refutes the indictment on Assange’s alleged hacking assistance to Manning – until now the sole ground of the “hacking” accusation. This switch, we averred, was an outrageous proposition. Was the whole hearing to start again on the basis of the new indictment?”
“Then, to our amazement, the prosecution did not put forward the new indictment at the procedural hearing at all. To avoid these problems, it appears they are content to allow the extradition hearing to go ahead on the old indictment, when that is not in fact the indictment which awaits Assange in the United States. This is utterly outrageous. The prosecution will argue that the actual espionage charges themselves have not changed. But it is the indictment which forms the basis of the extradition hearing and the different indictment which would form the basis of any US prosecution.”
This, in any fair and just universe, would be grounds for dismissal. You can’t extradite someone for one crime and then charge them with something else in a different jurisdiction. But we don’t live in a fair and just universe, but a very corrupt criminal universe where a criminal cabal does whatever it wants in the mane of “national security.” It’s been over four years since Wikileaks made their revelations and not one life has been lost or a country conquered because of them. All that was revealed was the criminality of governments and nothing has changed because of it other than a few people waking up… and that’s the real danger to the cabal presented by Julian and people like him. The cabal depends on ignorance to get away with their crimes, Julian, Wikileaks, and others like them present an existential threat to their criminality.
“None of which will come as any shock to those of us who have been paying attention. We have to continue to build public consciousness of the fact that the annihilation of a journalist for exposing war crimes, based on a catalogue of state lies and dodgy procedure, is not an act that the state can undertake without damage to the very soul of the nation.”
But the state doesn;t care about the soul of the nation, the state and the cabal that runs it cares only about money and power. People such as Julian must be destroyed in every way possible to send a message to others who might undertake similar projects. As Julian himself said: “If wars can be started by lies then peace can be started by truth.” This kind of “wrongthink” cannot be allowed if the cabal is to prevail. They will stop at nothing to silence Julian and anyone like him. Should his trial in America take place, we can expect another farce, a Soviet-like show trial like that of Roger Stone, except that no pardon from the president will be forthcoming. If anything like justice is to come from this, it will be up to the American people to make it happen. If what I’ve seen so far from the “patriots” is any indication, I’d say that Julian is pretty much fucked!