1. Day 3 Julian #Assange #extradition hearing.Important note before we start:though the whole case is based on alleged harm by #WikiLeaks’ publications
1. In the last 10 YEARS US has never found a case of death/injury
2. The indictment does NOT identify docs potentially harmful
1. In the last 10 YEARS US has never found a case of death/injury
2. The indictment does NOT identify docs potentially harmful
2. prof Paul Rogers, called to testify by the JA’s defence, ready to testify. He’s emeritus prof of Peace Studies at Bradford University and has published extensively on #Afghanistan and #Iraq
3. Paul Rogers: #WikiLeaks confirmed the degree of detail Afghanistan was NOT under control as the Bush Admin had told to the public
4. prof Rogers: one of the most significant part of #WikiLeaks publication on #Iraq was documenting civil victims, 15,000 never accounted before
5. Prof Rogers: Julian #Assange’ libertarian view: transparency and accountability are at the core of his beliefs for protecting human rights
6. Prof Rogers: Julian #Assange’s extradition case appears to be based on political motivations: his transparency and accountability are perceived as threats by this Trump Admin
7. prof Rogers, a political scientist: Julian #Assange’s political view? He’s a libertarian who believes in transparency and accountability to protect human rights
8. Prof Rogers, a political scientist:
#Trump sees Julian #Assange as an enemy. There is a huge involvement of political changes in US in this case
#Trump sees Julian #Assange as an enemy. There is a huge involvement of political changes in US in this case
9. Pretty irritating how James Lewis, lawyer for the US authorities,asks complex questions to witnesses, and requires short ‘yes’ and ‘no’ answers
10. Unbelievable how this hearing requires witnesses to find specific statements and facts in huge bundles containing hundreds and hundreds of pages and to do it very quickly as the US counsel asks complex questions and requires yes/no answers
11. Again: James Lewis,a lawyer representing US authorities, tries to put expert witnesses( yesterday he did it with prof Feldstein, today with prof Rogers) in a bad light representing them as “biased” experts, while they are required to be “unbiased”
12. Prof Rogers: why is this prosecution brought now? It is in the wider context of political changes in US
13. A political scientist, prof Rogers is able to deal brilliantly with insidious questions by James Lewis, the US counsel
14. James Lewis,a lawyer representing US authorities, insists again (how obsessive): this prosecution is narrowly limited to the publication of unredacted docs containing the names of informants/sources
15. annoying how prof Rogers is NOT allowed by James Lewis,the US counsel, to explain why, as an expert, he argues that this prosecution is POLITICAL. Isn’t absurd that a political scientist is not allowed to elaborate on this?
16. Brilliant answers by prof Rogers to James Lewis,US counsel, trying to imply that the reason why Obama Admin didn’t charge JA was because he was in the embassy. How absurd this argument: Obama charged Snowden though he was outside US jurisdiction
17. James Lewis, US counsel, has been cross-examing prof Rogers for an hour and a half now, and yet hasn’t allowed him to explain why he thinks this prosecution is politically motivated. Absurd
18. So at end James Lewis, US counsel, hasn’t allowed prof Rogers to explain why the #Assange prosecution is politically motivated. It’s absurd: as a highly qualified political scientist, prof Rogers was supposed to do that
19. Lunch break. hearing will restart at 2 pm London-time
20. Before the Julian #Assange extradition hearing restarts just want to make you understand how misleading the argument by US counsel, James Lewis ,that the Obama Admin did not prosecute JA because there was no purpose to charge him as he was in the Ecuadorean embassy
21. Obam Admin could have charged Julian #Assange using a narrowly limited indictment (as US counsel claims Trump Admin is doing) since April and July 2010, as Iraq Rules of Engagement and #AfghanWarLogs were published then and at that time JA was definitely NOT in the embassy
22. Had the Obama Admin wanted to charge JA for publishing unredacted docs naming informants/sources, the Obama Admin has almost TWO years to do so BEFORE JA entered the Ecuadorean embassy
23. Even after JA took refuge in the Ecuadorean embassy, the 19th June 2012,the Obama Admin had more than 4 years to indict him in a narrowly limited prosecution for publishing unredacted docs naming informants/sources.Obama could have done it any time, he didn’t
24. So it’s a matter of fact that Obama Admin did NOT charge JA, whereas Trump Admin did.
25. I apologise in advance for any typo in my threads about the Julian #Assange extradition hearing
26. You might ask:why is Lewis,the US counsel,challenging witnesses stating Obama didn’t indict JA? 1)he needs to show this prosecution is NOT political 2)it shouldn’t he easy to represent a government which will go down in history for being the 1st in US history to jail a journo
28. .@trevortimm testifying on how common for media orgs in these days to rely on submission platforms for whistleblowers,a solution pioneered by #WikiLeaks which allowed the org to get classified docs from one of the most important journalistic sources of all times: @xychelsea
29. James Lewis,US counsel,to Trevor Timm: your duties as an expert are: you should be unbiased and with no conflict of interest in the case. You do appear to have it
30. James Lewis, US counsel, argues Julian #Assange is NOT a journalist
31. Lewis, US counsel: the Department of Justice takes seriously journalism, #Assange is not a journalist
32. Unbelievable how the US counsel tries to argue this prosecution is NOT about journalism, when in fact the USDoJ put itself in charge of establishing who is a journalist and drawing the conclusion Julian #Assange is not
33. Again:James Lewis,US counsel,relies on The Guardian to argue Julian #Assange published unredacted documents putting lives at risk. newspapers which hugely benefited from #WikiLeaks files get repeatedly used by the US to support its “narrowly limited” prosecution
34. interesting to see that at least so far,the US counsel hasn’t provided any shred of evidence that #WikiLeaks caused harm, a part from quoting David Leigh, Luke Harding, Guardian
35. Trevor Timm: President. Trump has tweeted 2,200 times against the press. For me it’s very telling Trump’s DoJ is the first to indict a journalist after Nixon
35. most absurd question I ever heard in my life as a reporter: James Lewis, US counsel, asks to Trevor Timm didn’t put in his witness statement the info that prosecutors are prohibited to take into consideration political opinions of defendants
36. The fact that Trevor Timm didn’t put that info in his witness statement is interpreted by James Lewis, US counsel, as omitting info, hence being biased expert
37. Very easy to anticipate that the US cousel, James Lewis , will play this tactics of suggesting experts called to testify by the JA’s defence are NOT unbiased. He has done it with prof Feldstein, prof Rogers and Trevor Timm so far. He used very weak arguments
38. Trevor Timm, Director of @FreedomofPress, did manage Lewis’ cross-examination rather well
39. note:James Lewis, US counsel, tried to argue Trevor Timm isn’t an unbiased expert because in his statement he didn’t put an obvious thing:US federal prosecutors are prohibited to take into consideration the political opinions of people under investigation
40. 4.30 pm ( London-time): Hearing is out. Unfortunately tomorrow I won’t be able to cover it, please follow my colleagues
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
