Thread by @richimedhurst

Julian Assange's lawyer Jennifer Robinson and partner Stella Morris queue up outside the Old Bailey.

Day 2 of #Assange hearing begins shortly with several witnesses expected to testify incl. Pentagon Papers whistle blower @DanielEllsberg and investigative reporter Nick Hager.

-Human rights lawyers, Stafford Smith of @Reprieve is first witness to take the stand.

-He asserts the diplomatic cables released by WikiLeaks on US drone strikes in Pakistan were essential in helping curtail the killings and in conducting human rights investigations.

-Leaks were essential in exposing US targeted assassination and torture programs

-US was killing journalists, drug traffickers with no proof/questionable ties to any terrorist activity

-Smith: "drone program was unlawful, morally & ethically reprehensible"

-Asked about his work at Guantanamo Bay, Smith affirms WikiLeaks helped him prove numerous defendants innocent in court

-Smith details how appalled he was by all the US government's tortures and murders

-Says Gitmo would be closed if public actually knew what it was

-Smith says the torture methods used by US gov were so brutal they were akin to those of the Spanish Inquisition.

-All in all, WikiLeaks helped him to free innocents, take cases to ICC and were essential for his work.

-Prosecution is now cross examining Stafford Smith of @Reprieve

-Lewis QC (Prosecution) claims #AssangeCase isn't being prosecuted for things the NYT and WaPo also published, but instead for leaks marked classified which allegedly put people's lives at risk

-Rather amusingly, Smith is schooling Lewis on how the counts will be interpreted in the US, having worked many national security cases.

-#Assange interrupts Lewis to say "this is nonsense" (lmao). Judge stops hearing for 10 mins, urges Julian to speak to his counsel

-Judge threatens Julian that if he continues to interrupt, the court can continue without him (essentially threatening to try him in absentia). Preposterous. As if this could be anymore of a sham trial.

-Prosecution is trying very hard to get Smith to concede that @wikileaks documents were a threat to national security by attacking his credibility with things like: have you ever classified docs? Had security clearance? Are you an authority on such matters?

-Smith says covering up torture does not pertain to "national security". Has seen countless pages of abuse/torture marked "classified".

-Prosecution reasserts they're not prosecuting Julian for leaks but for allegeldy putting informants at risk w/ names in cables.

#AssangeCase

As I said in yesterday's live: people forget that Abu Qatada, a Jordanian cleric connected to Al Qaeda, was not only let out of Belmarsh (where Julian is) on house arrest, but an entire extradition treaty drawn up to protect him. He's now free in Jordan.

-Prof. of Journalism Feldstein resumes his testimony after tech issues yesterday.

-Says indictment vilifies journalism and Trump ramped up prosecution of journalists

-Feldstein: even Obama dropped the case because it violated 1st amendment and couldn’t go ahead

-Prosecution viciously attacking Feldstein’s credibility, essentially accusing him of purposely leaving out that prosecution was continued by Trump admin (implying case has merit)

-Lewis says tweet by @wikileaks also indicates admission of guilt

#Assange

-Prosecution makes ridiculous argument that the New York Times publishing same info is not a crime because they received leaks “passively”

-Lewis presses Feldstein whether journalists are above the law, cornering him into saying no

-Lewis continues grilling Feldstein. Asks him: “are journalists above the law, do they have a first amendment right to steal information?”.

Feldstein answers: no.

Lewis: are you aware of any case of the NYT conspiring with Manning [to steal info]

Feldstein: no

Lewis: so there is a difference between #Assange and the NYT?

Feldstein: yes

Lewis once again goes back to argument that #Assange is being charged for unredacted cables (attempting to contrast him with NYT)

Odd. Since not one person’s life has been put at risk by @wikileaks

Yes/no questioning of Feldstein by prosecution really doesn’t inspire any confidence tbh.

Lewis attempting to create a stark contrast between NYT and #Assange and keeps cornering Feldstein

Lewis quotes David Leigh, citing discomfort at Guardian about publishing unredacted names.

Asks Feldstein if there’s any fundamental difference between NYT and Assange to which Feldstein answers: yes.

Lewis: should journos disclose names of other parties endangering them when avoidable?

Feldstein: no

Lewis: are there legitimate things nations should keep secret?

Feldstein: yes

-In regards to the espionage act, Lewis says proof of damage to US must be provided to convict. Feldstein says he's no legal expert, but upon reading the counts doesn't think that's true (implying #Assange could still be extradited even if no damage is proven).

-Lewis tries to build on allegations of ties between Trump and WikiLeaks, in order to dismantle the idea that the hearing is politically motivated (as Feldstein suggested). Prosecution essentially delving into Russiagate territory now. #AssangeCase #Assange

-It's now #Assange's defense team's turn to question Feldstein.

Feldstein replies it's perfectly normal for journalists to ask gov officials for info. @nytimes actively helped @DanielEllsberg in obtaining Pentagon Papers.

Feldstein: journalists not passive stenographers

Feldstein asserts that the scope of the indictment is so large it's beyond just going after unredacted names/endangering lives – it's about going after journalists.

Feldstein: "proof is in the pudding". Obama admin only went after Manning, and then commuted sentence. If there was any legal basis to go after #Assange and @wikileaks they would've done so. #AssangeCase

Prof. Feldstein's testimony has ended. Court is adjourned. #AssangeCase

Fuck me this is grueling. Can't imagine what Julian, his family and team are going through.