Julian Assange Being Turned over to UK????

paulsurovell said:
I'm asking you.

 I have no idea.   Thanks for asking.

sbenois said:
Good

 Yeah, who needs First Amendment rights anyway.  That was just a "nice to have" not a real need. 

I must have missed the trial.  Can you give me a recap?

nan said:

DaveSchmidt said:
The superseding indictment changed the facts on the ground. It’s not surprising that reactions would change along with them.

 This is what I have been screaming about for months while you and others dismissed concern. This is why I started this thread, which was viewed as so controversial that it was moved to the MOL sub-basement with no protest. 

 You were right, they were wrong. Thanks for standing up for the First Amendment. And especially for standing up against the bullying.

sbenois said:
Good

 So we have one vote for the new Assange indictment.

Waiting to see how he justifies his position.

paulsurovell said:
 So we have one vote for the new Assange indictment.
Waiting to see how he justifies his position.

Thank you to the fine men and women of the Federal Grand Jury who took the time to review the evidence presented to them.   I respect their judgement and decision to return indictments.

nan said:

 This is what I have been screaming about for months while you and others dismissed concern. This is why I started this thread, which was viewed as so controversial that it was moved to the MOL sub-basement with no protest. 

The new charge is not the same as the previous charge. You’ve been screaming about different facts.

DaveSchmidt said:
The new charge is not the same as the previous charge. You’ve been screaming about different facts.

 I've been screaming about how everyone needs to support Assange because of First Amendment rights. That's the main idea.  You are talking about details. 

Professional Assange Smearers Finally Realize His Fate Is Tied To Theirs

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/05/25/professional-assange-smearers-finally-realize-his-fate-is-tied-to-theirs/?fbclid=IwAR0bp-ToFycMbDH0s6MRmF959pNr2ttwhJekJUMax13MA5xcHigJKVvdjmo

nan said:

 I've been screaming about how everyone needs to support Assange because of First Amendment rights. That's the main idea.  You are talking about details. 

OK. Nevertheless, screaming about main ideas without regard to details has a somewhat checkered history.

From the first day of this thread, the concern was about protecting Assange from legal action because of the DNC hacking, in connection with the Mueller investigation. 

 This is from page 1 - -

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

sbenois said:

paulsurovell said:
 So we have one vote for the new Assange indictment.
Waiting to see how he justifies his position.

 


Thank you to the fine men and women of the Federal Grand Jury who took the time to review the evidence presented to them.   I respect their judgement and decision to return indictments.

 But you also agree with their judgment. Why?

South_Mountaineer said:
From the first day of this thread, the concern was about protecting Assange from legal action because of the DNC hacking, in connection with the Mueller investigation. 
 This is from page 1 - -

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

Click to Read More

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

 

 The first indictment had nothing to do with the DNC.

paulsurovell said:
 But you also agree with their judgment. Why?

 I have tremendous confidence in these fine people.

sbenois said:

paulsurovell said:
 But you also agree with their judgment. Why?

 I have tremendous confidence in these fine people.
 

What do you know about the members of the Grand Jury?

Nothing.    

paulsurovell said:
 The first indictment had nothing to do with the DNC.

 Read my post again. I’ll even make it easy, and add highlighting. 

South_Mountaineer said:
From the first day of this thread, the concern was about protecting Assange from legal action because of the DNC hacking, in connection with the Mueller investigation. 
 This is from page 1 - -

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

Click to Read More

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

 

South_Mountaineer said:

paulsurovell said:
 The first indictment had nothing to do with the DNC.

 Read my post again. I’ll even make it easy, and add highlighting. 

South_Mountaineer said:
From the first day of this thread, the concern was about protecting Assange from legal action because of the DNC hacking, in connection with the Mueller investigation. 
 This is from page 1 - -

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

Click to Read More

South_Mountaineer said:
From the first day of this thread, the concern was about protecting Assange from legal action because of the DNC hacking, in connection with the Mueller investigation. 
 This is from page 1 - -

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

Click to Read More

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

 

 

Click to Read More

South_Mountaineer said:
From the first day of this thread, the concern was about protecting Assange from legal action because of the DNC hacking, in connection with the Mueller investigation. 
 This is from page 1 - -

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

Click to Read More

nan said:
Julian Assange is a journalist hero and we should be grateful that he bravely provided critical information that our government (including the DNC) was hiding from us. He did this at great personal cost.  We need to know these things.  I can't believe there are people who don't think we should not know about DNC corruption and other revelations.  How are we supposed to fight to make things better?  Do you prefer a 1984 Big Brother environment?  His motivation does not matter (whatever it is and no one knows), but not standing up for him will hurt everyone's free speech in the long run:


Uncomfortable Questions in the Wake of Russia Indictment 2.0 and Trump’s Press Conference With Putin
https://www.lawfareblog.com/uncomfortable-questions-wake-russia-indictment-20-and-trumps-press-conference-putin



except:  " . . . There is a lot of anger against WikiLeaks and a lot of support for indicting Julian Assange and others related to WikiLeaks for their part in publishing the information stolen by the Russians.  If Mueller goes in this direction, he will need to be very careful not to indict Assange for something U.S. journalists do every day.  U.S. newspapers publish information stolen via digital means all the time.  They also openly solicit such information through SecureDrop portals.  Some will say that Assange and others at WikiLeaks can be prosecuted without threatening “real journalists” by charging a conspiracy to steal and share stolen information. I am not at all sure such an indictment wouldn’t apply to many American journalists who actively aid leakers of classified information.  And even if such a principle could be crafted that would nab WikiLeaks and spare the New York Times, a successful indictment and prosecution of WikiLeaks figures for conspiring to publish stolen information would certainly narrow protections for “mainstream” journalists and raise questions about SecureDrop and other interactions with sources who peddle stolen information. . ."

 

 

But that changed in April when Assange was indicted for matters unrelated to the DNC.  What didn't change were the positions of the people posting on the thread. Defenders of Assange saw the indictment as a pretext in the US effort to extradite and persecute Assange for his First Amendment activities. They have been proven right.

sbenois said:
Nothing.   

Perfect.

paulsurovell said:
But that changed in April when Assange was indicted for matters unrelated to the DNC.  What didn't change were the positions of the people posting on the thread. Defenders of Assange saw the indictment as a pretext in the US effort to extradite and persecute Assange for his First Amendment activities. They have been proven right.

 If the first indictment was a pretext to extradite, and he’s still in Britain, the why the new indictment?  Or maybe your theory is wrong. 

South_Mountaineer said:

paulsurovell said:
But that changed in April when Assange was indicted for matters unrelated to the DNC.  What didn't change were the positions of the people posting on the thread. Defenders of Assange saw the indictment as a pretext in the US effort to extradite and persecute Assange for his First Amendment activities. They have been proven right.

 If the first indictment was a pretext to extradite, and he’s still in Britain, the why the new indictment?  Or maybe your theory is wrong. 

 It was known from the beginning that the extradition process would take months if not years. We don't know yet exactly why they did it now, but the new indictment clearly represents hostility toward the media within the Trump administration. My guess is that Pompeo and Bolton probably were the prime movers and had no trouble convincing Trump to approve it. I don't think Barr is that stupid.

Or it was Putin's idea.

Tide of Public Opinion is Turning in Assange’s Favor

https://consortiumnews.com/2019/05/27/tide-of-public-opinion-is-turning-in-assanges-favor/

Chuck Todd tries to show support for Julian Assange but his teleprompter and tiny brain get in the way.

nan said:
Chuck Todd tries to show support for Julian Assange but his teleprompter and tiny brain get in the way.

 Great video, Nan. Confirms again that Russiagate is a mental disorder.

test

jamie said:
test

 Was it a jump to the left, and then a step to the right?

just trying to fix the most recent date - instead of a month - your last post says 7 hours ago.  we'll delete these posts after we fix it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/28/indictment-assange-is-blueprint-making-journalists-into-felons/?utm_term=.29f90ff650aa

Must-read analysis of the new Assange indictment by Glenn Greenwald.rpoint

paulsurovell said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/28/indictment-assange-is-blueprint-making-journalists-into-felons/?utm_term=.29f90ff650aa
Must-read analysis of the new Assange indictment by Glenn Greenwald.rpoint

Thanks for posting that, Paul.  Great article--this part made me take a long breath:

With these new charges, the Trump administration is aggressively and explicitly seeking to obliterate the last reliable buffer protecting journalism in the United States from being criminalized, a step that no previous administration, no matter how hostile to journalistic freedom, was willing to take. The U.S. government has been eager to prosecute Assange since the 2010 leaks. Until now, though, officials had refrained because they concluded it was impossible to distinguish WikiLeaks’ actions from the typical business of mainstream media outlets. Indicting Assange for the act of publishing would thus make journalism a felony. By charging Assange under the Espionage Act, the Trump administration proved the asylum Assange obtained from Ecuador in 2012 — offered in the name of protecting him from persecution by the United States for publishing newsworthy documents — was necessary and justified. 

paulsurovell said:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/05/28/indictment-assange-is-blueprint-making-journalists-into-felons/?utm_term=.29f90ff650aa
Must-read analysis of the new Assange indictment by Glenn Greenwald.rpoint

 Glenn's following Rachel's lead?