33 Comments
Mar 27·edited Mar 27

It is giving the U.S. government a chance to make assurances, and thus lie, that they will then ignore once Assange is on U.S. soil. The U.S. government is notorious for such things, and violating treaties. Thus, the whole decision is ridiculous. It is also one of the British court's tactics to cover their back sides and disingenuously make it look like "they did everything they could could to protect the defendant's rights". That's why they're letting Assange have so many appeals; that is, if they rule against the U.S. government's assurances and allow Assange to appeal further, which is unlikely.

It is all posturing and nothing but "show hearings" (versus "show trials"---he's not on trial in the U.K. and has been held for years in PRE-TRIAL proceedings, so I won't call it a show trial). Holding someone in pretrial punishments for so long without a trial is already a violation of U.S. law(s) [denial of a speedy trial in violation of the Sixth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights], and though I realize that right now Assange is under U.K. jurisdiction and law(s), the U.K. judicial system must have similar constitutional and/or other legal requirement(s) for speedy trials, which have been violated in Assange's case.

The whole thing is modern-day insanity on steroids, and a sign of the times that we have entered into the time of totalitarian government, and nothing but show hearings and trials like in days of old, in all of the Western governments. Thus, liberty, freedom, rights, and True Justice are going the way of the dodo bird, for the sake of global government and the system of unelected "rules-based international 'order'". In times like these, Assange can't get any True Justice, or any fair hearings or trial(s). The deck is completely stacked against him. Biden must dismiss the case, but he very likely won't do so.

"Espionage" for doing the job of journalism, and being a check and balance on government and corporations like journalists are supposed to be, is absolutely absurd, but under a totalitarian system like we are increasingly under now, it is considered "justice". In the U.S. in particular, and probably in the other Western countries as well, the definition of the word "justice" has long been the exact opposite of True Justice, but now justice is being even more turned on its head, and made completely upside-down and backwards, and the antithesis of True Justice. In such neo-Nazi courts Assange doesn't stand a chance.

The U.S. Espionage Act should have long ago been rewritten to prevent just this type of malicious prosecution for nothing but the non-violent exercise of First Amendment free speech rights, and the rights and exercise of journalism; or, barring that, it should have been repealed long ago. Just law is not supposed to be used as cudgel, but is supposed to be as fair as possible, and completely unbiased and unprejudiced, but that is not what we have in the West today. Instead, we increasingly have a system of systematized railroading, extortion of guilty pleas, and unjust trials. Assange shouldn't have to plead guilty to ANYTHING!

Expand full comment

The best thing that could happen, imo, is that the illegitimate Biden Admin drop the charges, as Assange's lawyers stated. Assange should be a free man, and be able to testify against the US for the murder of Seth Rich, and who was really responsible for the DNC email hacks. It was not Russia.

Expand full comment

JIHADJOE CANT EVEN DISSMISS HIS FILLED UP DEPENDS

Expand full comment

I am so broke. I would LOVE to support you! I buy a $1 lottery ticket every week, and I know it's stupid, but I hope to win, and if/when I do, I will send a BIG FAT CHECK.

What is being done to Julian Assange (amongst all the rest of the Incredible Fuckery of the Globby Fascist Useless Cheater Nasties on Humanity) is nothing but EVIL. GO GET 'EM!!!!!!

Expand full comment

🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

Expand full comment

How come he can use the First Ammendment to plead innocent, but we, the citizens that live here in the USA, are having our First Ammendment rights stripped from us? I don't agree on those grounds.

Expand full comment

I wouldn't trust them as far as I could throw them

Expand full comment