Much of the ongoing debate about Wikileaks founder Julian Assange being kicked out of the Ecuadorean embassy in London has centered on whether he could somehow avoid being taken into U.S. custody once his legal woes with the Brits were sorted out. The second question Ive posed since we heard he would be leaving was whether or not the White House even wanted to deal with the hassle of bringing him here. But now theres a new twist to the story. Could Assange be planning to come to America voluntarily?

There were some rumors about this earlier in the week but they seemed too unlikely to bring up here. Now, however, theres at least partial confirmation that the story might be true. Wikileaks is claiming that the Senate Select Intelligence Committee has invited Assange to testify before them without specifying a time or location. And Assange is supposedly giving the proposal serious consideration, assuming he gets something in return. (NPR)

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is seriously considering a request to testify in person before the U.S. Senate intelligence committee about Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, according to a statement from his lawyer.

Assange has been holed up at Ecuadors embassy in London since 2012, in part over fears that he could be extradited to the U.S. and potentially face trial over leaking massive troves of documents.

On Wednesday, the WikiLeaks Twitter account posted a letter that it says was delivered to Assange via the U.S. embassy in London. The purported document is signed by committee Chairman Richard Burr and Vice Chairman Mark Warner and asks that Assange make yourself available for a closed interview with bipartisan Committee staff at a mutually agreeable time and location as part of the probe.

You can read the letter yourself. It looks official enough and the committee members arent denying it. (Though theyre not confirming it, either.)

If this offer is authentic it would have some wide-ranging implications on a number of nagging issues. Its coming from the two senior members of the Intelligence Committee representing both parties. What would they want to talk to Assange about now? Weve been interested in possibly arresting him over the publications of the massive trove of military intelligence files he got from Chelsea (then Bradley) Manning, but I seriously doubt hes interested in coming to America to discuss that. Would they want him to talk about where Wikileaks got the hacked DNC emails from the 2016 election as part of the Russia probe? Thats the more likely answer.

But to get him to voluntarily fly to Washington (assuming thats where it would happen), hed probably be demanding complete immunity and a promise that he wouldnt be taken into custody for any reason. Thats a big ask and if the U.S. is even considering offering it they must think hes got some seriously interesting stories to tell. Of course, since the letter specified a mutually agreeable time and location, they might even be considering traveling to England to talk to him. Wouldnt that make for some intriguing news cycles?

So could this really be how the Julian Assange saga ends after all these years? He signs an agreement, gives a bit of testimony and rides off into the sunset, returning to the helm of Wikileaks and suffering no consequences? It hardly seems possible, but then again its 2018. The boundaries of possibility have been stretched rather thin.

View post:
We hear Julian Assange is 'seriously' considering coming to ...

By James Cogan 15 August 2018

The investigation headed by Special Counsel and former FBI director Robert Mueller into alleged collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia during the 2016 presidential election has entered a new stage.

Mueller is seeking to substantiate the case he advanced last monthas part of the indictment of 12 Russian intelligence officersthat Trump campaign insider Roger Stone and WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange were part of a conspiracy to hack and publish emails sent by the Democratic National Committee (DNC) and Hillary Clintons campaign chairperson John Podesta (see: In run-up to Trump-Putin summit, Mueller charges 12 Russian officers with DNC email hack).

At least eight alleged associates of Roger Stone have been questioned or subpoenaed by Muellers investigation. One, Kristin Davis, gave a voluntary interview last month and was instructed to give formal testimony again to a grand jury last Friday. Another, Andrew Miller, refused to appear the same day and has been ruled in contempt of court. Last Thursday, Mueller also subpoenaed radio commentator and WikiLeaks supporter Randy Credico to testify on September 7.

Credicos lawyer stated last Friday that the Mueller investigation probably want to talk to him about Roger Stone and Julian Assange. Kristin Davis told CNN on Monday that the grand jury had questioned her about whether or not any collusion happened with Russia.

The purported evidence of a nefarious plot involving Russian intelligence, Stone and WikiLeaks is threadbare to the point of being ludicrous.

Julian Assange publicly revealed in an interview that WikiLeaks had information on the Democratic campaign in June 2016. It published the DNC leaks on July 22, 2016.

Roger Stone claimed to be communicating with Assange on August 8. His first alleged messages to Randy Credico, however, asking the radio host if he could use his connection with Assange to find out if WikiLeaks had more material, were not even sent until September.

Likewise, Stones tweets to alleged hacker Guccifer 2whom American intelligence claims was a front for Russian agencieswere sent after WikiLeaks was in possession of the leaked emails and had already published the DNC files.

While WikiLeaks cannot and does not reveal its sources, a credible claim has been made by one of its supportersBritish whistleblower Craig Murraythat the leaks were made by DNC insiders, not hackers.

In regard to the DNC and other Democratic Party emails, the source is irrelevant in any case. By any standard of journalism, they were newsworthy. They exposed the real conspiracy that had taken place in the course of the presidential election: a deliberate campaign by the ostensibly impartial DNC to undermine the campaign of Bernie Sanders and ensure Hillary Clinton won the nomination.

WikiLeaks published the DNC emails on the eve of the Democratic Party National Convention. The revelations provoked fury among many of the 13 million Americans who had voted for Sanders in the Democratic primaries, in large part due to their support for his denunciations of the billionaire class and populist vows to fight for greater social equality.

DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was forced to resign in disgrace before the convention. After it concluded, DNC CEO Amy Dacey, CFO Brad Marshall, and Communications Director Luis Miranda also resigned.

On October 7, 2016, WikiLeaks published a trove of emails sent by John Podesta, the chairman of the Clinton campaign. As with the DNC leaks, the information was highly newsworthy. The emails included transcripts of speeches given by Hillary Clinton to various bank and corporate forums, where she boasted of her support for Wall Street and commitment to the interests of the financial oligarchy.

The exposures made by WikiLeaks only served to underscore what millions of American workers and youth had already decided, faced with the choice between Trump and Clinton: neither big business candidate could be supported. Trump won the Electoral College and the presidency because, amid an overall fall in voter turnout, Clinton did not win sufficient support in a small number of key states, despite winning the overall national popular vote by more than three million. Russian meddling, even if it were taking place, had no significant role in the outcome.

The entire Russian interference conspiracy theory could be dismissed as absurd if it were not being so relentlessly pursued by powerful sections of the American establishment, and did not have such immense implications for both democratic rights in the US and world political relations.

The campaign has served deeply reactionary purposes. Firstly, it has been used to demand sweeping censorship of oppositional, primarily left-wing views from internet search engines, Facebook and other social media sites, on the pretext of purging fake news.

At the same time, it has played a significant role in the intensified persecution of Julian Assange himself. The WikiLeaks editor has been slandered as a Russian stooge, even as his communication with the outside world has been cut off and preparations made to force him out of the Ecuadorian embassy in London, where he was granted political asylum in 2012. Assange faces the danger of being detained in Britain while American authorities file to extradite him to the US to stand trial on false charges of espionage.

Secondly, the hysteria over meddling has been used to pressure the Trump administration to maintain a bellicose foreign policy against Russia, threatening to trigger conflict in the Middle East and Europe.

Finally, the claim of collusion is clearly viewed as a possible means to force out or impeach Trump, ending his erratic presidency through a palace coup, and replacing him with his right-wing, Christian fundamentalist vice president Mike Pence.

The accusations against Roger Stone are central to this agenda. The unstated insinuation is that Trump, through his relations with Stone, was in some way aware of, and consented to, a plot to influence the election outcome.

On September 27, 2017, Stone faced down hostile questioning by the House Intelligence Committee. He specifically denied the charge that I had advance knowledge of the timing, content and source of the WikiLeaks disclosures from the DNC. He stated that his only communication with WikiLeaks had taken place through a journalist who served as a go-between. He later named Randy Credico.

Credico has indicated he will contradict Stone before the Mueller investigation, to the extent that he denies that exchanging some messages made him a go-between for the right-wing political operator with WikiLeaks. He has also indicated, however, that he will testify that he does not have any knowledge of a direct relationship between Stone and Assange.

WikiLeaks has repeatedly tweeted that it did not discuss the details or schedule of its publications with Stone.

The main consequence of Muellers subpoena of Credico, and ongoing pursuit of Stone, over alleged links to WikiLeaks is that it ensures that Russian meddling will remain prominent in the US media in the lead-up to the November congressional elections.

The forces that stand behind the hysteria appear to be calculating that the constant accusations that the Trump campaign engaged in collusion or even treason will help ensure the Democratic Party wins a majority in the House of Representatives. This would provide a new base of power for conducting investigations and otherwise putting pressure on the administration, as well as raising the possibility of impeachment.

Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Site from search results.

To fight this blacklisting:

Read more:
Mueller investigation seeks to implicate WikiLeaks and Julian ...

A congressman who doubts that Russia hacked Democratic emails during the 2016 election has been unable to speak with President Trump despite a full year attempting to broker a pardon for WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange in exchange for information disproving Russian culpability.

Its unclear why exactly the White House has kept Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif., at an arms length, and whether the decision is an example of uncharacteristic restraint by Trump or a result of interference by deputies fearing reputational or legal hazards.

Rohrabacher told the Washington Examiner he believes that fear of special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation has prevented the conversation from happening.

"Assange assured me the Russian government was not responsible for the hacking and distribution of the DNC emails during the 2016 election. Assange told me he had hard evidence to prove that case, and there are highly qualified retired intelligence officers who back up his claim, Rohrabacher said.

I have been unable to follow through on that conversation for fear on the part of the White House that the special prosecutor would try to make that into an appearance of collusion, he said. Obviously, the special prosecutor has found no evidence of collusion and his efforts have undermined the American peoples right to hear the true story and hindered the administrations ability to get its job done.

Rohrabacher, a libertarian-leaning surfer and Congress' first open medical marijuana user, met with Assange in Ecuadors London embassy on Aug. 15, 2017, and told reporters afterward that the transparency activist could prove Russia did not hack Democratic emails.

At first, Rohrabacher said he would speak with Trump before going public with earth shattering information that could contradict assessments of Russia's role by U.S. spy agencies. He predicted he would speak with Trump "within two weeks" a guess that proved optimistic.

Rohrabacher spoke with White House Chief of Staff John Kelly on Sept. 13 about brokering a pardon for Assange who fears secret U.S. charges. Kelly didnt tell Trump, though someone did tell the Wall Street Journal, which reproduced quotes from the call.

Almost two weeks later, Trump told reporters on the tarmac of a New Jersey airport that he hadnt heard about Rohrabachers effort to discuss an Assange pardon. Ive never heard that mentioned, really, Ive never heard that mentioned, Trump said on Sept. 24.

In early October, Rohrabacher sought help from Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., who frequently speaks with Trump. But a Paul spokesman described the meeting as no more than "a courtesy."

With options dwindling, Rohrabacher paced outside a late October meeting between Trump and Senate Republicans. There too he failed to get a word with the commander in chief, who possesses nearly unchecked federal clemency power.

A White House spokesman did not respond to a request for comment. But there are various possible explanations, including the fact that Rohrabachers views on Russia are widely viewed by the political establishment as heretical.

The congressman reportedly was considered a possible espionage recruit by Russians. After Russias annexation of Crimea and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine, he called for internationally monitored secession votes, bucking nearly uniform condemnation of Russia.

According to a criminal case made public in July, Rohrabacher dined in February 2017 with accused Russian agent Maria Butina, two years after attending a meeting in St. Petersberg with Russian banker Alexander Torshin that she organized. Rohrabacher was not named in court documents, but his identity was confirmed in leaks to the media.

Assanges fate, meanwhile, is more uncertain than at any point since took he refuge in Ecuadors British embassy in 2012 to avoid questioning for alleged Swedish sex crimes. His access to the internet and visitors was cut earlier this year and Ecuadors president said in a recent interview authorities were discussing an end to his refuge.

Assange claimed the Swedish sex allegations were part of a U.S. plot to extradite him to face American charges related to publishing military and diplomatic secrets in 2010 provided by Chelsea Manning. The Swedish investigation ended without charges last year, but he still faces possible arrest for British bail violations.

Despite Rohrabacher's frustrated attempts, Trump has expressed doubt about Russia's role in election-related hacking, and routinely calls Mueller's probe a "rigged witch hunt." He also has ordered deputies to listen to other skeptics of U.S. spy agency claims of Russian responsibility.

Then-CIA Director Mike Pompeo met with former National Security Agency employee Bill Binney late last year on Trumps orders, apparently after the president watched Fox News coverage of a report Binney helped author questioning whether overseas hackers could remotely download vast amounts of Democratic data.

The president said I should talk to you for facts, Pompeo allegedly told Binney, who professes that U.S. spy agencies took a wild ass guess when they blamed Russia for hacking the Democratic National Committee.

Barry Pollack, an attorney for Assange, said he believes presidential clemency is warranted for Assange, who reportedly was not charged during the Obama administration after federal prosecutors decided they could not indict him without setting a precedent allowing charges for mainstream journalists.

A pardon would be an appropriate way to put an end to the legal jeopardy Mr. Assange faces as a result of publishing truthful information, Pollack said.

Read the original:
Julian Assange pardon push going nowhere one year later

WASHINGTON The leaders of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence sent a letter to WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange last week requesting that he speak with committee staffers about his connections to the Russian interference in the 2016 elections.

WikiLeaks on Wednesday posted on Twitter an image of the letter, which was signed by the committee's chairman, North Carolina Sen. Richard Burr, and the ranking Democrat, Virginia Sen. Mark Warner. Wikileaks wrote on Twitter that its legal team is "considering the offer but testimony must conform to a high ethical standard."

Spokespeople for both Burr and Warner declined to comment.

Assange and WikiLeaks played a key role in the interference of the 2016 campaign by nefarious Russian actors. WikiLeaks disseminated hacked emails from top Clinton campaign adviser John Podesta, as well as hacked emails from the Democratic National Committee.

The letter comes as reports indicate that the Ecuador government plans to expel Assange from the embassy, in which he has been confined since 2012. The looming eviction of Assange from the embassy is reportedly imminent and could come in a matter of weeks.

If Assange is evicted from the embassy in London, he risks not only being arrested by UK authorities, but potentially being extradited to the United States.

Read this article:
Julian Assange wanted to testify before Senate Intelligence ...

Julian Assange Is About To Lose Asylum And Be Arrested according to the intercept and Glenn Greenwald.

Ecuadorian president Moreno says that Assange violated the conditions of his asylum by being political but many say the real reason is that he wants to gain favor with the US, Spain, and the UK.

Assange was once a darling of the left but for many reasons that has flipped with the left attacking him and the right praising him. What does his loss of asylum mean for journalistic freedom and is Assange more than just a publisher?

SUPPORT JOURNALISM. Become a patron athttp://www.patreon.com/Timcast

My Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnews

Newsroom - https://discord.gg/fEHem77

Merch - http://teespring.com/timcast

Make sure to subscribe for more travel, news, opinion, and documentary with Tim Pool everyday.

Amazon Prime 30 day free trial - http://amzn.to/2sgiDqR

MY GEARGoPro Karma - http://amzn.to/2qw10m4GoPro 6 - http://amzn.to/2CEK0z1DJI Mavic Drone - http://amzn.to/2lX9qgTZagg 12 AMP portable battery - http://amzn.to/2lXB6SxTASCAM Lavalier mic - http://amzn.to/2AwoIhI Canon HD XF 105 Camera - http://amzn.to/2m6v1o3Canon 5D MK III Camera - http://amzn.to/2CvFnnm360 Camera (VR) - http://amzn.to/2AxKu4R

FOLLOW MEInstagram - http://instagram.com/TimcastTwitter - http://twitter.com/TimcastMinds - http://Minds.com/TimcastFacebook - http://facebook.com/TimcastnewsBitcoin Wallet: 13ha54MW2hYUS3q1jJhFyWdpNfdfMWtmhZ

SEND STUFF HERE

Tim Pool330 Washington Street - PMB 517Hoboken, NJ 07030

See the original post here:
Julian Assange Is About To Lose Asylum, Arrest Imminent

Over 50 years ago, in his letter from the Birmingham Jail, addressing a struggle of the civil right era, Martin Luther King Jr. wrote, We will have to repent in this generation not merely for the hateful words and actions of the bad people but for the appalling silence of the good people. His message is now more prevalent than ever in the current political climate surrounding WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange.

WikiLeaks stepped onto a global stage with release of a huge trove of classified documents revealing government secrecy. After the publication of war logs that exposed the atrocities committed by U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, the reaction of the Pentagon quickly escalated into a war against the First Amendment. WikiLeaks was subjected to unlawful financial blockades and there has been an ongoing secret grand jury against the organization and its associates since 2010.

These efforts to destroy WikiLeaks brought a long dreadful persecution of Assange. He has been detained for 8 years, first in prison, then under house arrest and now as a refugee living in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. In 2012 he was granted political asylum against the threat of extradition to the U.S., relating to his publishing activities with WikiLeaks. The UK government, in violation of UN rulings that indicated the situation of Assange as arbitrary detention, kept him in confinement, depriving him of medical care and sunlight.

This plight of Assange has been largely ignored by American mainstream press and there has been an appalling silence on this issue even among political activists.

In late March, this already untenable situation got worse. Pressured by the U.S., Ecuadors new President Lenin Moreno put Assange in isolation by cutting off his access to the Internet, denying him phone calls and visitors, including Human Rights Watch. The latest news about him indicates that the Ecuadorian government is close to finalizing an agreement with British officials to evict Assange from the embassy. How did this all happen? Here we have a Western journalist, who has not been charged with any crime, being punished for providing information that shed light on crimes and corruption of governments. This plight of Assange has been largely ignored by American mainstream press and there has been an appalling silence on this issue even among political activists.

Villain, hero or useful idiot?

WikiLeaks has been consistently vilified by U.S. officials across two major political parties. After the publication of U.S. diplomatic cables, Rep. Peter King, a New York Republican, designated the whistleblowing site as a terrorist organization, calling for aggressive prosecution. Similar reactions were made by Democrats. Former Vice President Joe Biden compared Assange to a high-tech terrorist, while senator and chairman of the Intelligence Committee Dianne Feinstein urged him to be prosecuted for espionage.

As officials jumped to condemn this new media organization, the public responded differently. WikiLeaks, with the release of the collateral murder video in 2010, that provided an everyday scenery of the War on Terror in the Middle East instantly became a hero among liberals. This was contrasted with Republicans who tended to view the release of U.S. Diplomatic Cables as harmful, with conservative leaders calling Assange a traitor.

This attitude toward WikiLeaks flipped during the election season in 2016. WikiLeaks publication of damaging information from the Hillary Clinton campaign during the final weeks leading up to the election was met with Democrats hostile criticism. In their minds, WikiLeaks has changed. It no longer represented a champion of free speech that they once saw. To them, WikiLeaks appeared to have been taken over, being weaponized for the agenda of their political opponent.

As mainstream media hype of Russiagate came full on, demonization of WikiLeaks increased, depicting the transparency group as Putins puppet for meddling with the U.S. election.

As mainstream media hype of Russiagate came full on, demonization of WikiLeaks increased, depicting the transparency group as Putins puppet for meddling with the U.S. election. Contrary to progressives suspicion and animosity toward the organization, support for WikiLeaks grew among conservatives during the most recent presidential race. Right wing commentators on Fox News and politicians like Sarah Palin cheered WikiLeaks. Trump repeatedly praised the organization during his campaign. Ever since it attained public notoriety, WikiLeaks has become many things for different people. Assange has been called a villain, a hero or a useful idiot. But what is WikiLeaks, who is Assange and what is his agenda?

Crushing bastards

Julian Paul Assange is a computer programmer and journalist with an independent mind and deep knowledge of the workings of hidden forces of control. Raffi Khatchadourian, a staff writer at The New Yorker, who profiled Assange in his article in 2010, described how this Australian native, who recently obtained citizenship in Ecuador came to understand the defining human struggle not as left versus right, or faith versus reason, but as individual versus institution.

Described how this Australian native, who recently obtained citizenship in Ecuador came to understand the defining human struggle not as left versus right, or faith versus reason, but as individual versus institution.

In his 2006 seminal writing Conspiracy as Governance, Assange identified authoritarian regimes as patronage networks of political elites. He analyzed how this network maintains its power through the use of secrecy, restriction, and the control of national and global communication and information. Assange conceived WikiLeaks upon this understanding of the structure of power. With its innovative technical infrastructure and the method of transparency, the organization revolutionized the function of the press.

As a transnational journalistic entity that is entirely funded by public donations, WikiLeaks places no allegiance to any nations, corporations or political ideology. Its sole loyalty lies in the principle of democracy, using a leak as a tool for information warfare to perform a function of watchdog, restricting the power of institutions and protecting the rights of individuals. This fidelity to checks and balances is demonstrated in Assanges ability to speak truth, no matter who is in power.

In Obamas second term of presidency, while many who voted for him were still mesmerized under the spell of hope and change, Assange was able to penetrate the deception and see lies and hypocrisies of this president who received a Nobel Peace Prize, while simultaneously engaging in multiple wars. In the statement after one year in the embassy where he called for global support for the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden, who was charged with espionage, Assange fiercely denounced Obamas war on whistleblowers.

In Obamas second term of presidency, while many who voted for him were still mesmerized under the spell of hope and change, Assange was able to penetrate the deception and see lies and hypocrisies of this president who received a Nobel Peace Prize, while simultaneously engaging in multiple wars.

During the 2016 presidential campaign, WikiLeaks released documents concerning one of the major candidates that would inherit the throne of this global imperial power. With the publication of documents that revealed internal workings of the Clinton campaign, WikiLeaks brought vital information that could help American people carefully scrutinize their political system and crush bastards that try to attack and undermine democracy.

If the organization had documents concerning Trump, WikiLeaks indicated that they would have published it. In responding to accusations of WikiLeaks favoring the Trump campaign with the DNC leaks, Assange made it clear that the role of the organization is to publish whatever is given to them, and they will not censor their publications for any political reasons.

The recent article written by an Italian journalist Stefania Maurizi, who worked with WikiLeaks for nine years, backs this claim. In sharing her insider view of the organization, she described how the decision of the timing of Podesta leaks was made and how Assange and his team were preparing to release material on Trump, which didnt materialize, as it was already published before.

Defense of American ideals

This revolutionary journalism that Assange created through WikiLeaks resonates with the ideals that founded the United States. In fact, Assange pointed out how WikiLeaks derives its inspiration from the American revolutionary ideas and that it aligns its mission with these ideals.

Similar to the faith in the wisdom of ordinary people to govern themselves, expressed in the preamble of the Constitution with its first words We the People, Assange believed in the significance of ordinary people and their ability to engage in history. Thomas Jefferson recognized how, Our liberty cannot be guarded but by the freedom of the press. Just as founders of this country did not trust their own government and created a safeguard for individual liberty, Assange believed in the importance of an informed public in the functioning of democracy.

Just as founders of this country did not trust their own government and created a safeguard for individual liberty, Assange believed in the importance of an informed public in the functioning of democracy.

From its inception in 2006, WikiLeaks has been working to defend these American values. When the laws that protect whistleblowers were gutted, it is through Assange and WikiLeaks staffs adamant commitment to the principle of free press that made it possible for former U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning to exercise her uncompromising free speech. Also, it is because of WikiLeaks journalist Sarah Harrison, with her courage in demonstrating extraordinary source protection that Snowden is now able to enjoy his rights that were denied by his own country.

WikiLeaks, as the worlds first global Fourth Estate, extended the freedom of speech, not only for Americans, but for people all around the world. As of late 2016, it published 10 million documents with a pristine record of authentication. The organization, by making full archives available in a searchable format, brought back information that belongs to the public, directly into their own hands. From the election in Kenya to the Icelandic revolution, WikiLeaks publications empowered people in many countries, creating greater social change and sparks for global uprisings. Information made available has been used to bring justice in courts and address numerous human rights abuses.

Until the moment he was cut out from the outside world, this editor in chief of the worlds most prosecuted publisher defended ordinary peoples right to self-determination. From a tiny sanctum in the Ecuadorian Embassy of London, Assange followed Catalans struggle for independence and continuously spoke out against Spanish Central governments abuse of their democratic rights.

Self-righteous betrayal of democracy

So, did WikiLeaks change? Has this organization that once cracked our heart open with uncensored images of modern war lost its ideals? WikiLeaks illuminated our minds with a large cache of documents detailing dirty secrets of powerful figures, including over 650,000 critical documents concerning Putins Russia. Are they now really compromised?

WikiLeaks has not changed. It has not abandoned American ideals that have fueled the engine for this organization. WikiLeaks accepts information that is of public interest. It verifies and publishes authentic documents that fit the criteria of having diplomatic, political, ethical, or historical significance, which has not been published before, and which is being suppressed. It does this, no matter who is in office and which nation-state rises to global dominance, and even if doing so makes it a target of massive political retaliation.

Similarly, WikiLeaks, by revealing the corruption of the American political system, tried to awaken moral courage for voters to take back their democracy that has long been stolen.

WikiLeaks influence on U.S. politics in 2016 with the publication of documents that belong to Clinton campaign manager can be likened to efforts of consumer advocate Ralph Nader in the electoral arena. Nader, through his third party presidential run aimed to awaken in American people a fire in the belly that could challenge the corporate two-party duopoly. Similarly, WikiLeaks, by revealing the corruption of the American political system, tried to awaken moral courage for voters to take back their democracy that has long been stolen.

The publication of Podesta files exposed WikiLeaks to the same bigotry and bullying that Nader had faced back then, where the Democratic Party with their ardent middle class devotees blamed him for George W. Bushs presidency and called him a spoiler. Now, the Democratic establishment, with MSNBC cable news stations and commentators, recycles the old tactics of defamation. They branded Assange as a Trump supporter and Russias intelligence asset. By even filing the lawsuit against the organization, they directed their vengeance to this whistleblowing site about the loss of Clintons campaign.

Yet, just as Naders third party presidential efforts could not spoil the election that was already so rotted, WikiLeaks could not ruin the political campaign that was so corrupted to the core. It is not WikiLeaks, but Americans who have been compromised. It is we who have fallen for a manufactured national politics that is designed to divide and conquer us every four years with new packaged candidates of the same product.

It is we who have fallen for a manufactured national politics that is designed to divide and conquer us every four years with new packaged candidates of the same product.

We have lost the revolutionary spirit that founded this nation, its vigilance toward government and have settled for the lesser of two evils. By engaging in our self-righteous crusade for defending our allegiance to leaders, parties and to the flag we plead to, we have betrayed our own interests and ideals.

Claiming our sacred heart

With the publication of Vault 7, a series of leaks on the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, fury against WikiLeaks now intensifies. The Trump cabinet continues the war on the First Amendment that began under the Obama administration. In recent months, Trumps Justice Department Jeff Sessions stated that Assanges arrest is a priority. Mike Pompeo, former CIA Director and the current U.S. Secretary of State, referred to the whistleblowing site as a non-state hostile intelligence service and indicated WikiLeaks as a force that subverts the U.S. Constitution.

From a traitor and a Kremlin puppet to a spoiler of American democracy, words are thrown around to create distortion. Bombarded by loud media sound bites, in this illusion of democracy, many can no longer hear a voice of conscience that knows what is right and they now remain silent. As Ecuador now prepares to hand over Assange to British authorities for a financial reward, by breaking its own Constitution of the Republic, our democracys last line of defense is about to be severed. Cruel treatment of Assange is no longer a character assassination and imprisonment of one innocent man. What is at stake is the death of the sacred heart of democracy that remembers our inherent obligation to one another. In his earlier blog, Assange wrote about the moral courage required in our age:

Every time we witness an injustice and do not act, we train our character to be passive in its presence and thereby eventually lose all ability to defend ourselves and those we love.

He reminded us that what drives our will to crush bastards is a gentle love that inspires us to nurture the vulnerable. In a world where there is WikiLeaks, the veil of secrecy can no longer be maintained. The released information revealed the abuse of the powerful on the most vulnerable amongst usthose that are voiceless, ailing and impoverished. Calamity happening in Knightsbridge under the heightened security at the heart of London represents the injustice of the world that this fearless journalist and his courageous sources brought to us all to bear witness. It is now laid out for those who are willing and ready to see the truth.

Prosecution of Julian Assange is a persecution of American ideals. Criminalizing the act of publishing through the Espionage Act destroys the First Amendment as the guardian of democracy. This not only sets a dangerous precedent for press freedom, but it could allow the beginning of a new totalitarianism. We must break our silence and refuse to participate in the destruction of values that founded this country. It is time for us all to put aside ideological differences and unite in solidarity with people around the world who are engaging in non-violent resistance against this assault on WikiLeaks and our right to free speech.

Only through sincere efforts to keep our eyes open to the truth before us, can we have a chance to end the tyranny of the past that casts its shadow ever more into the present. If our silence has led to this great tragedy that we face now, the victory of democracy can be brought through each of us claiming the center of our heart to stand up for this fellow man who sacrificed his liberty so that all can be free.

Read more here:
Why Americans Need to Defend Julian Assanges Freedom

By Mike Head 2 August 2018

As the danger mounts that WikiLeaks editor Julian Assange will soon be forced to leave Londons Ecuadorian embassy, where he was granted political asylum in 2012, a member of his legal team has called for the Australian government to guarantee his right, as an Australian citizen, to return to the country.

The lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, said Assange wants to exercise his right to return to Australia, provided he is protected from extradition to the United States, where the Trump administration, the FBI and the CIA are intent on jailing the WikiLeaks editor for many years, or executing him, on concocted espionage-related charges.

Speaking to news.com, Robinson said Assange was grateful for the support of the Australian public. I would say he is homesick for Australia, he would love to go back, but we have been disappointed by previous governments failure to take action and it is time the Australian government listens to that and takes action.

Robinson emphasised: Julian is still an Australian citizen and they have an obligationand I think a dutyto exercise rights of protection over an Australian citizen.

Prominent Australian civil liberties lawyer Julian Burnside, who visited Assange in June, also published a statement last week urging the Australian government to intervene to bring him safely back to Australia. The WikiLeaks founder had provided an historic public service by revealing the secrets of the worlds unaccountable forces.

These calls, evidently made on Assanges behalf, underscore the importance of the demand issued by the globally-broadcast rally conducted by the Socialist Equality Party (SEP) of Australia, with the support of well-known investigative journalist John Pilger, in Sydneys Town Hall Square on June 17. That rally demanded that the Australian government secure Assanges right to return to Australia, if he so wishes, with guarantees that he not be handed over to the US.

Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno, whose government has taken a lurch to the right to seek a rapprochement with Washington and the European imperialist powers, has been engaged in intensive discussions with the British authorities, who will arrest Assange as soon as he steps outside the embassy so that he can be thrown in jail and ultimately extradited to the US.

Assange has never been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime. It is more than a year since Swedish prosecutors finally dropped a trumped-up warrant for his arrest to be questioned about dubious sexual assault allegations. Nevertheless, Theresa Mays British Tory government remains determined to jail him, supposedly for skipping bail when Ecuador granted him asylum six years ago.

Mays government is obviously acting in close concert with the US state apparatus. Britain has refused repeatedly to give Assange any guarantee against extradition. Trumps administration, like Obamas, wants to silence Assange and WikiLeaks forever because of their ongoing and courageous work in exposing to the worlds people the mass surveillance, war plans and regime-change plots conducted by Washington and its allies, including Britain and Australia.

In testimony to the US Senate Judiciary Committee in May 2017, then-FBI Director James Comey effectively confirmed that Assange was entirely justified in seeking political asylum in 2012. He hasnt been apprehended [by US authorities] because he is inside the Ecuadorian embassy in London, Comey testified. Senior Trump administration officials, from former CIA Director Mike Pompeo down, have made it clear that Assanges detention is a high priority.

Robinson said Canberra had good relationships with both Britain and US, so it should not be difficult for Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbulls government to intervene. However, she said the past record raised concerns about the governments willingness to stand up for Australians when the US government was involved.

The truth is that successive Australian governments, starting with Julia Gillards Labor government in 2010, have not only refused to defend Assange. They have actively colluded with the US frame-up, which Gillard publicly declared her government would assist in any way it could.

In March 2011, when in opposition, Turnbull delivered a speech at the Sydney University Law School in which he denounced Gillard for falsely accusing Assange of breaking the law. When an Australian citizen is threatened in this way, an Australian prime minister should respond, Turnbull said.

Since taking office, however, like all their predecessors, Turnbull and his ministers have given the green light for Assange to be delivered into the hands of the same spy and military forces whose murderous and anti-democratic activities WikiLeaks has exposed.

Most recently, at a media conference in London on July 20, Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop declared that Assanges plight was a matter for British law enforcement authorities.

Bishop stood alongside her British counterpart, Jeremy Hunt, who boasted that Assange faced serious charges and would receive a warm welcome from the British police once he left the embassy.

Robinson told news.com that Hunts statement was curious because Assange faces no charges whatsoever. Even if Assange were convicted of breaching bail, that is only punishable by a maximum of three months in prison, and is not considered a serious charge by law.

Robinson asked: So is Mr Hunt talking about an extradition request from the US where he would face serious charges? Has he misspoken and disclosed that?

Robinson said Assanges legal team had sought assurances from Britain there was no US extradition request and had been met with a standard, blanket will not confirm or deny.

Robinson warned that Assanges health is deteriorating. Its an untenable situation, she said. Im very concerned about the permanent damage to his health. He is without adequate access to the outdoors and exercise and it has had a serious impact on his health. The UK government refuses to allow him get medical help and leave (which is) a humanitarian issue.

Apart from a vague call by former Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, published on July 25, for an end to the persecution of WikiLeaks, and a brief tweet by ex-Greens leader Christine Milne, there has been total silence in Australias political establishment about the grave danger facing Assange.

The SEP is the only political party campaigning for Assanges defence in Australia, which is part of the broader fight necessary for the defence of all fundamental democratic rights.

At the June 17 Sydney rally, SEP national secretary James Cogan explained: The Australian government had and still has undeniable diplomatic power and legal discretion, under international and national law, to intervene to defend an Australian citizen who is being unjustly treated by another state.

Cogan stressed: At this rally, we are not asking the Turnbull government to act. We are telling it. We hold the Labor Party and the Coalition parties fully responsible for the harm and outrages committed against Julian Assange. We will hold them responsible for what happens next. They will be held to account by the working class in Australia.

From the outset, the World Socialist Web Site and SEP have explained that a movement to defend Assange and WikiLeaks cannot be built by appeals to the political, trade union and media establishment that has abandoned him. It will be built by a fight to politically educate and independently mobilise the working class.

As part of this campaign, we urge our readers to take part in protests if Assange is forced from Ecuadors embassy into British police custody and then faces a protracted struggle against any attempt to extradite him to the United States.

The author also recommends:

Julian Assange and the betrayal of Latin Americas left[28 July 2018]

Imminent threat to Julian Assange underscores need for global defence movement[23 July 2018]

The Campaign to Free Julian Assange

Google is blocking the World Socialist Web Site from search results.

To fight this blacklisting:

Originally posted here:
Julian Assanges lawyer: Australian government has a duty ...

Wikileaks fugitive Julian Assange must eventually leave Ecuador's embassy in London, the country's president has said.

Lenin Moreno said he had spoken to the British government about the situation, amid speculation that the long-running stand-off is coming to a head.

A UK government spokesman said that while discussions were ongoing, the matter was not talked about during Mr Moreno's latest UK visit.

Australian-born Assange has been holed up in the country's embassy since 2012 to avoid being extradited to Sweden to face sexual assault allegations, which authorities have since dropped.

British police still want to arrest him for breaching bail conditions.

Assange fears he will be extradited to the US if he leaves the embassy in Knightsbridge.

In 2010, WikiLeaks published secret US military documents and diplomatic cables detailing alleged war crimes and human rights violations.

In March, Ecuador's government cut off Assange's internet connection after he complained about the arrest of a Catalan separatist politician on social media, despite promising not to interfere in other countries' affairs while seeking refuge in the embassy.

Last December, Assange was made an Ecuadorean citizen - and the country unsuccessfully tried to register him as a diplomat with immunity as part of its efforts to have him leave the embassy without risk of being detained.

A briefing to MPs last month from one of Assange's legal team said the UK could resolve the impasse by providing a diplomatic assurance against US extradition.

They heard claims that Assange had been living under "harsh" conditions, with no access to sunlight or outdoor exercise, but things have worsened "dramatically" since his communications were cut and that the "situation is clearly untenable".

More here:
Julian Assange must eventually leave London embassy, says Ecuador

JULIAN Assange the Australian WikiLeaks founder in exile at a London embassy wants the Turnbull Government to urgently intervene in his case as he faces the imminent prospect of expulsion from his refuge.

Assange could be kicked out of the Ecuadorean Embassy in the coming weeks after that countrys new president indicated he wanted the 47-year-old to leave, and only intended to ensure he wouldnt face the death penalty if extradited to the United States. The WikiLeaks boss has been at the embassy since 2012.

The development comes as new British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt claimed Assange was facing serious charges from local police. But there is confusion about what they are, as he is only facing a minor charge for breaching bail.

Jennifer Robinson, Assanges lawyer in London, told news.com.au she was obviously very concerned about the speculation he could be forced from the embassy.

We are monitoring that really closely. From our point of view he requires ongoing protection (because) the risk of prosecution is as high as it has ever been.

The Times quoted a source familiar with the case who expected Assange would lose his asylum status imminently. This means he will be expelled from the embassy. When this will happen is impossible to say.

It was Ms Robinsons view, and Assanges, that Australia could help break the stalemate.

Julian is still an Australian citizen and they have an obligation and I think a duty to exercise rights of protection over an Australian citizen, she said. They could usefully engage in this to help solve the impasse.

Ms Robinson said Canberra had good relationships with both the UK and US, so it shouldnt be a difficult matter.

For me as a fellow Australian citizen, it is disappointing the government has not done more but that doesnt preclude them from doing it now and I very much hope that they will.

She said it raised concerns about the Federal Governments willingness to stand up for Australians when the US Government was involved.

Assange was grateful for the support of the Australian public.

I would say he is homesick for Australia, he would love to go back, but we have been disappointed by previous governments failure to take action and it is time the Australian Government listens to that and takes action.

Ms Robinson was mystified as to what charges Mr Hunt was referring to.

Jeremy Hunts statement is curious in the sense that Mr Assange doesnt face any charges whatsoever A magistrate will have to decide whether to bring bail proceedings against him when he leaves the embassy.

A Swedish investigation into allegations of rape against Assange has been dropped but he remains concerned he will be arrested and then handed over to the US if the country applies for him to be extradited.

Assange sought refuge and was granted asylum in the embassy in 2012, fearing he would be sent to the US for publishing hacked military emails. He has not left the building, near the luxury department store Harrods in the exclusive London district of Knightsbridge, since then, and his health is said to be rapidly getting worse.

Even if he was convicted of the minor bail charge, it was only punishable by a fine or maximum three months in prison, so is not considered a serious charge by law.

So is Mr Hunt talking about an extradition request from the US where he would face serious charges? asked Ms Robinson. Has he misspoken and disclosed that?

She told news.com.au that would be a serious matter. Assanges legal team had sought assurances from the UK there was no extradition request and had been met with a standard, blanket will not confirm or deny.

So if Mr Hunt is talking about serious charges there are none on the public record, so of course, we are concerned about what that might be from the US.

Ms Robinson said the UK Government had refused for eight years to give Ecuador an assurance Assange wouldnt be extradited to the US. That assurance alone could bring an end to the long-running drama, which is taking an increasing toll on him.

Its an untenable situation. Im very concerned about the permanent damage to his health. He is without adequate access to the outdoors and exercise and it has had a serious impact on his health. The UK Government refuses to allow him get medical help and leave (which is) a humanitarian issue.

She told news.com.au the case came down to the US seeking to prosecute a publisher from publishing activities.

Recent indictments in the US issued by Special Counsel Robert Mueller implied Assange and WikiLeaks were a conduit for Russian intelligence in distributing hacked Democratic Party emails in 2016, CNN reported.

Assange has always insisted the emails were not received from the Russians or any state party.

When he was campaigning for the presidency, Donald Trump praised WikiLeaks for publishing information from Hillary Clintons private email server but his Attorney-General Jeff Sessions has said arresting Assange was a priority.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop said the Government was offering Assange consular support. The Australian Government has provided consular support and will continue to do so as is required, she said.

We understand there are still matters where Mr Assange is subject to British legal proceedings so therefore that would be a matter of British law enforcement authorities and agencies.

andrew.koubaridis@news.com.au

More:
Julian Assange: WikiLeaks founder wants Australian government ...

There's a degree of additional pressure following the US' indictment of 12 Russian officers over election-related hacking -- the charges offered not-so-subtle hints that investigators believed Russia coordinated the leak of hacked data with WikiLeaks to maximize its impact. However, Assange's legal team also asserted that his health is "deteriorating" after six years of living in the same place, with few chances to experience natural light. He didn't help matters when he lost internet privileges in March for violating Ecuador conditions forbidding political commentary, further cutting him off from the outside world.

Just what happens in an expulsion isn't clear. While Sweden suspended the sexual assault case that prompted Assange to hide in the Ecuadorian embassy, there has been talk of the US prepping espionage charges against him. CNN has confirmed that the UK is in "ongoing" negotiations with Ecuador and the US to make sure Assange isn't in danger if he leaves, but there's no guarantee that he'll exit with those kinds of promises in place. Short of a successful court objection, Assange might might face a prompt US extradition regardless of his condition.

The rest is here:
WikiLeaks' Julian Assange could face 'imminent' embassy expulsion