assange attorney jen robinson reacts to new espionage charges

Submitted by wendy davis on Sat, 05/25/2019 - 11:58am

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VmLvnb-tGgw]

on Democracy Now!, May 24, 2019

as i'd said on my 'Jeez, amy goodman..' diary, she sometimes gets it right. on assange, she always has.

the transcript's at the link. i will say her answers on the death penalty were fuzzy to me, but she and the clip with michael ratner on citizenship v. the (murky at best) US Espionage Act were interesting, although not necessarily directly relative to outcome, rendition, or not. Corbyn as PM later?

Tags: 
free julian assange; jennifer robinson
Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

Submitted by Sirena on Sat, 05/25/2019 - 1:36pm

Interestingly enough she said something I think we both thought Jeremy Corbin had said otherwise which was he would, not wouldn’t support Assange’s extradition and prosecution.

I think we need to get clarification on this point, Wendy, as potentially it could make a world of difference to Julian’s future and to knowing to whom to try to appeal his case.

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by wendy davis on Sat, 05/25/2019 - 6:50pm
wendy davis's picture

@Sirena

PM in the new election he's demanding, corbyn could change his mind, but even shadow home secretaty abbott had also shown her true colors as per this diary.you're remembering. and of course perrsons (?) did re-open the 'preliminary investigation' (how orwellian) and claimed she was about to issue a warrant for julian's arrest and request extradition. but the race is on among the tories vying to become the new head of the party soon, so how that plays out as to timing will likely matter a lot. time sensitive because: his swedish extradition hearing is on june 3; his US extradition hearing in Crown Court is on june 12.

now those who have read the indictment (35 pages pdf) say that he's being charged with soliciting whistleblowing on waterboarding, torture at gitmo, and several other US war crimes. i don't have the links handy, but i could dig them up if you'd like.

a bit of interesting dark history to me is that jennifer, michael ratner, assange, and john perry barlow (the latter two deceased) had started the freedom of the press foundation back in the day. not many years ago wikileaks was thrown off that board, which had been anonymizing contributions for wikileaks. not one of the members had uttered a peep, including some of the fearless investigative journalists at the intercept: trevor timm, GG,
poitras, iirc, plus john cusack, daniel ellberg, and the rest.

the special rapporteur on torture nils mezler said he'd report on julian's condition, but it's been two weeks ago, and last i'd checked he hadn't. after i press Save, i'll go look at RT UK.

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by wendy davis on Sat, 05/25/2019 - 6:00pm
wendy davis's picture

@assangelegal (hannah jonnason) account on the rape case in sweden:

now this one i can't read w/ my crap eyes:

but given the intercept's crap treatment of julian, this trio of trump McReistancers slayed me, as in they don't give a toss about his plight, really:

“Let me be clear: it is a disturbing attack on the First Amendment for the Trump administration to decide who is or is not a reporter for the purposes of a criminal prosecution,” Sanders wrote in a tweet Friday afternoon after The Intercept contacted his office for comment. “Donald Trump must obey the Constitution, which protects the publication of news about our government.”

Warren distanced herself from Assange but condemned the Justice Department’s move to curtail press freedom. “Assange is a bad actor who has harmed U.S. national security — and he should be held accountable,” Warren said in a statement. “But Trump should not be using this case as a pretext to wage war on the First Amendment and go after the free press who hold the powerful accountable everyday.”

“This is not about Julian Assange,” Wyden said in a statement. “This is about the use of the Espionage Act to charge a recipient and publisher of classified information. I am extremely concerned about the precedent this may set and potential dangers to the work of journalists and the First Amendment.”

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by Alligator Ed on Mon, 05/27/2019 - 6:51pm
Alligator Ed's picture

@wendy davis with every breath she takes. Too chicken to appear on Fox. Too cowardly to go up against the Evil Queen before the '16 Mass primary. WTF does she stand for? Is she really going to deregulate Wall Street if she had the chance--and heaven help the Republic if she ever does get the chance?

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by wendy davis on Tue, 05/28/2019 - 5:39pm
wendy davis's picture

@Alligator Ed

what she stands for, past wanting to head the consumer financial protection bureau.

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by skod on Sat, 05/25/2019 - 9:47pm
skod's picture

torture him for a while, and then kill him. As they will Manning. They will do this because they can- there is nobody to stop them. Orwell had it right: "The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. Now do you begin to understand me?"

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by wendy davis on Sun, 05/26/2019 - 9:44am
wendy davis's picture

@skod

you and orwell, although assange is being tortured NOW in belmarsh prison: solitary confinement 23 hours a day if the weather cooperates. dunno if he's being tortured further than that, but i sure o wish we'd have heard from nils melzer after his 'medical examination'.

i'd have thought more folks might have been interested to hear what jennifer robinson had to say, i'll admit. hope you read or listened, pirate cat. ; )

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by ggersh on Sun, 05/26/2019 - 11:01am
ggersh's picture

@wendy davis https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-05-25/professional-assange-smearers-...

Professional Assange Smearers Finally Realize His Fate Is Tied To Theirs

Authored by Caitlin Johnstone,

Rachel Maddow has aired a segment condemning the new indictment against Julian Assange for 17 alleged violations of the Espionage Act.

Yes, that Rachel Maddow.

MSNBC’s top host began the segment after it was introduced by Chris Hayes, agreeing with her colleague that it’s surprising that more news outlets aren’t giving this story more “wall to wall” coverage, given its immense significance. She recapped Assange’s various legal struggles up until this point, then accurately described Assange’s new Espionage Act charges for publishing secret documents.

“And these new charges are not about stealing classified information or outsmarting computer systems in order to illegally obtain classified information,” Maddow said.

“It’s not about that. These new charges are trying to prosecute Assange for publishing that stolen, secret material which was obtained by somebody else. And that is a whole different kettle of fish then what he was initially charged with.”

“By charging Assange for publishing that stuff that was taken by Manning, by issuing these charges today, the Justice Department has just done something you might have otherwise thought was impossible,” Maddow added after explaining the unprecedented nature of this case.

“The Justice Department today, the Trump administration today, just put every journalistic institution in this country on Julian Assange’s side of the ledger. On his side of the fight. Which, I know, is unimaginable. But that is because the government is now trying to assert this brand new right to criminally prosecute people for publishing secret stuff, and newspapers and magazines and investigative journalists and all sorts of different entities publish secret stuff all the time. That is the bread and butter of what we do.”

up
0 users have voted.
—

I never knew that the term "Never Again" only pertained to
those born Jewish

"Antisemite used to be someone who didn't like Jews
now it's someone who Jews don't like"

Heard from Margaret Kimberley

Submitted by wendy davis on Sun, 05/26/2019 - 12:15pm
wendy davis's picture

@ggersh

but i've already read it, as snoopy'd put it up. i just don't see it that way, as miz madcow had criminalized him as the objected to Trump's prosecution of assange), tra la la, just like the folks in spooky intercept's piece above. imo, it's by way of a partisan thing this form of #McResistance. but consortium news loves caitlin on assange, and for good reason, but this one...sigh. no hope to me what.so.ever.

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by Alligator Ed on Mon, 05/27/2019 - 7:14pm
Alligator Ed's picture

@ggersh before changing directions. The MSM is finally realizing that their headlong plunge into undermining presidential legitimacy (not to be confused with presidential policy) is leading them to disaster.

From your Zerohedge reference:

Finally the Maddow crowd which has been fruitlessly expending all their energy so far on punching at Russian shadows will actually be attacking a real thing.

If Trump's DOJ wins this case, he will have successfully destroyed the First Amendment. No publisher could publish state secrets, even if true. Let alone, the semantic disarticulation of the concept of publisher which would result.

David Richmond, leaker-buddy of James the Weasel Comey--off to jail with you--and few tears will be shed by Trump supporters. Also on the list will be ANY so-called pundit (who by no means are either publishers nor journalists) who published or disseminated in any way whatever the government decides was confidential. The ipso facto includes any and all truthful information of governmental crimes.

Trying to get a charging rhinoceros to change course will be like getting Wile E. Coyote to stop short of falling off the cliff (pardon the mixed metaphors). Well, the Madcow must finally be realizing that more than her $35K is on the line here--it's her ass. And Chris Hayes. And A.C. von Vanderbilt, etc.

Jumping at Shadows. Indeed.

Funny how reality can bite you in the rear when you thought you were in control.

[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iy7IonOLQd8]

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by wendy davis on Mon, 05/27/2019 - 5:51pm
wendy davis's picture

against the charges against assange: NYT, wapo, guardian, etc., and i suppose this is interesting news:

up
0 users have voted.
Submitted by wendy davis on Tue, 05/28/2019 - 5:43pm
wendy davis's picture

‘Assange’s request to postpone alleged rape hearing due to bad health denied’, RT.com, 28 May, 2019

“A Swedish court has rejected a request to postpone a hearing on the detention of the WikiLeaks founder. Julian Assange’s lawyers requested the court session be postponed due to their client’s ill health.

Swedish prosecutors reopened a rape case against Assange earlier this month after Assange was hauled from London’s Ecuadorian embassy and jailed for skipping a bail hearing in 2012. The rape investigation was originally dropped in 2017, and Assange has maintained his innocence since the case was first opened."

[Well, duh, so had the court found him innocent, and never charged him.]

The prosecutors filed a request to have Assange detained in absence last week “on probable cause suspected of for rape.” Detention in absence would allow the Swedish government to issue an arrest warrant for Assange.
Swedish defense lawyer Per Samuelson told Reuters on Tuesday that he sought to have the hearing postponed following a visit to Assange in custody on Friday.
“One of the reasons is that Assange's health situation on Friday was such that it was not possible to conduct a normal conversation with him,” Samuelson said. The lawyer said that any hearing should be stalled until Assange could talk the case through with his legal team “in peace and quiet.”

WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson has said that the rape case against Assange was reopened as a result of “considerable political pressure on Sweden.” Assange is also the subject of a US extradition request, relating to his publication of a trove of classified US military and diplomatic documents in 2010.

up
0 users have voted.