Quantcast
Channel: First Amendment – Citizen WElls
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 14

Assange hearing and testimony update September 8, 2020, UK & US courts, Seth Rich trials, US narrows espionage charge to only naming informants

$
0
0

Assange hearing and testimony update September 8, 2020, UK & US courts, Seth Rich trials, US narrows espionage charge to only naming informants

“Why John Brennan, Peter Strzok and DOJ Needed Julian Assange Arrested”…The Conservative Treehouse November 3, 2019

“Re: Seth Rich, keep an eye on the National Security Division of the Justice Department. As you can see from the federal complaint, the NSD ignored a FOIA request that I filed back in 2018 for records about Seth Rich. And look at Paragraph 16, plus Exhibit 8. I think NSD is playing a bigger role in the “Russian hacking” narrative than most of us understood. By sending Seth Rich records there, it’s easier to keep things classified. So why would a “street robbery” investigation need to be classified?”…Attorney Ty Clevenger July 22, 2020

“Assange testimony requested in Rich v Butowsky et al  August 24, 2020”…Citizen Wells

 

From Consortium News September 8, 2020 UK lunch break.

“US Tries to Narrow its Espionage Charge to Only Naming Informants; Defense Quotes Indictment to Prove Otherwise

Julian Assange was also warned by Judge Baraitser that he would be removed if he makes another outburst. U.S. crimes abroad on display.”

“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 documents.

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 documents 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, which Smith evaded by returning 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.”

Read more:

https://consortiumnews.com/2020/09/08/live-updates-assange-hearin-day-two-us-tries-to-narrow-its-espionage-charge-to-only-naming-informants-defense-quotes-indictment-to-prove-otherwise/

Julian Assange testimony is requested in active US lawsuits.

Here is one.

From Rich v Fox News Network.

“Fox News seeks testimony in response to the following specific questions:
1) What was Mr. Assange’s role (if any) in the establishment of WikiLeaks?
2) What was Mr. Assange’s role (if any) in connection with the activities of WikiLeaks in 2016?
3) In 2016 and 2017, what role (if any) did Mr. Assange have regarding the content of WikiLeaks’ Twitter postings?
4) What was Mr. Assange’s involvement (if any) in WikiLeaks’ July 22, 2016 release of emails and documents from the Democratic National Committee (DNC), as referenced at https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/?
5) When were those emails and documents provided to WikiLeaks?
6) How did WikiLeaks obtain the DNC emails and documents?
7) Which individual(s) and/or entit(y/ies) provided the DNC emails and documents to WikiLeaks?
8) Which individual(s) and/or entit(y/ies) obtained those materials from the DNC?
9) Describe any role played by Seth Rich to your knowledge in obtaining those materials and/or providing them to WikiLeaks.
10) To your knowledge, has WikiLeaks ever offered a reward for information related to a murder that occurred in the United States other than in relation to the murder of Seth Rich? If so, on how many occasions?
11) Why did WikiLeaks provide a reward for information related to the murder of Seth Rich?
12) Has Mr. Assange ever communicated with Seth Rich in any manner?
13) If so, what was the content of the communications?
14) If Mr. Assange himself has not communicated with Seth Rich, is Mr. Assange aware as to whether any person affiliated with WikiLeaks ever communicated with Seth Rich in any manner?
15) If so, (a) who communicated with Seth Rich? And (b) what, to Mr. Assange’s knowledge, was the content of such communication(s)?
16) Has Mr. Assange ever communicated in any manner with another member of the Rich family, including (but not limited to) Aaron Rich, Joel Rich, or Mary Rich?                                                                                                                                     17) If so, what was the content of those communications?
18) To Mr. Assange’s knowledge, has any other person affiliated with WikiLeaks ever communicated in any manner with a member of the Rich family?
19) If so, (a) who communicated with the Rich family? And (b) what, to Mr. Assange’s knowledge, was the content of such communication(s)?
20) To Mr. Assange’s knowledge, did any individual(s) and/or entit(y/ies) affiliated with the Russian Federation (including, but not limited to, the FSB, SVR, GU (or GRU), FSPSI, or any other intelligence service) play any role in obtaining and/or providing to WikiLeaks the 2016 DNC emails released by WikiLeaks?”

Read more:

https://citizenwells.com/2020/08/28/julian-assange-testimony-letters-rogatory-issued-august-27-2020-in-rich-v-fox-network-to-be-served-on-julian-assange-in-the-united-kingdom/

 

More here:

https://citizenwells.com/

http://citizenwells.net/

 

 

 

 

 


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 14

Trending Articles