British High Court of Justice will announce their ruling on the US government's effort to overturn a district judge's decision, which blocked the extradition of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. I'm covering.
Thread for following proceedings at the High Court.
If you are not familiar with the grounds of appeal in the Julian Assange case submitted by the US government, which the High Court will rule for or against today, here is the guide I assembled outlining each aspect:
Programming Note: I've reported on every stage of the case against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange pursued by the US government. thedissenter.org/tag/julian-ass…
While decision on US government's appeal in Julian Assange's extradition case is announced by High Court, the US government is also hosting a "Summit For Democracy," where US officials are speaking about "political prisoners" and "climates of fear," etc.
Lord Chief Justice Burnett is on High Court. As @declassifiedUK reported, "Assange’s fate lies in the hands of an appeal judge who is a close friend of Sir Alan Duncan—former foreign minister who called Assange 'miserable little worm' in parliament." declassifieduk.org/assange-judge-…
These journalists, along with @SMaurizi, are good reporters who have worked diligently to cover the extradition case against Assange. And you can follow them all this morning for additional coverage:
The High Court of Justice is in session. Decision on appeal in Assange extradition case to be announced.
Lord Justice Holroyde is presenting the High Court decision, first recapping the history since the district judge ruled against extradition #Assange
Holroyde makes clear the appeal was "limited to the issue of whether the district judge was wrong to find that Mr. Assange’s decision was such that it would be oppressive to extradite him."
Holroyde says the appeal is allowed. District judge ought to have notified US of her provisional view to afford it the opportunity to offer assurances to the court #Assange
BREAKING NEWS: High Court rules in favor of US government and overturns the district judge decision that blocked Julian Assange's extradition. Case is remitted to Westminster Magistrates Court and instructed to send case to Secretary of State for extradition.
As stated by Holroyde, the High Court was satisfied the possibility of Special Administrative Measures, or SAMs, would be excluded and Assange would not be sent to supermax prison. Rejected criticisms from Assange's legal team.
We can expect an appeal from Assange's legal team to be filed in response to this decision.
In meantime, I'm going live as I normally do with a report on what just unfolded:
President Biden's administration cannot reasonably claim to support principles of democracy and human rights while at same time seeking the extradition of a publisher, Julian Assange, which is opposed by global press freedom organizations. They are a threat through this case.
High Court of Justice rejected three grounds for appeal put forward on behalf of the US that included the argument that the judge inappropriately determined extradition would be oppressive to Julian Assange's health.
High Court of Justice allowed two grounds for appeal - the district judge should have let the US offer assurances before denying the request (Ground 2) and the UK government was offered a package of 'assurances' to address the judge’s decision (Ground 5)
Here is my report on the decision from the High Court of Justice in Julian Assange's extradition case.
Assange's legal team plans to appeal the High Court decision which backed extradition to the United States
Reality Winner didn’t commit espionage. She was found guilty of violating the Espionage Act. That’s an important distinction that responsible broadcast journalists should make for viewers. #60Minutes
Rather condescending opening as #60Minutes dwells on her name and says that may not be the most baffling aspect of her story
At the British High Court of Justice, Julian Assange's defense present their response(s) to the United States government's effort to overturn a district court decision, which blocked extradition.
Thread for updates on the second day of the appeal hearing.
To recap: On Day 1, Crown prosecutors, led by James Lewis QC, attacked the work done by District Judge Vanessa Baraitser, who weighed facts to determine if it would be "oppressive" to Assange's mental health to grant US government's extradition request.
The Crown Prosecution Service goes before the British High Court of Justice to present the United States government's appeal in extradition case against Julian Assange. Proceedings start around 10:30 am London Time.
Thread for updates on the first day of the appeal hearing.
This lays out each of the US government's "grounds for appeal" that will be argued at the High Court of Justice.
(If at any moment you have trouble understanding what is being argued, here's a guide for the appeal hearing: thedissenter.org/a-guide-to-the…)
Prosecutors will talk quite a lot about "assurances," which were offered by the US government AFTER the extradition request was blocked by District Judge Vanessa Baraitser on January 4 and AFTER the extradition hearing in September 2020.
Police stories are all around. They dominate network TV. They drive news coverage. They determine city budgets, with outsized portion going to cops instead of programs that can address basic human needs.
I don't think this takes us "someplace you might not expect to go," NYT.
Viewed alongside recurring copaganda in the New York Times, it's not so exceptional. It's establishment journalism following a blueprint for Lifetime movie. The author likely believes it should unite those divided over police cause it gives us the feels.
Just a few weeks ago, the New York Times published a report that promoted police views on crime without disclosing a major conflict of interest by the author, Jeff Asher, who has a background with CIA/Palantir/police/prosecutors, etc.
The final entry in Dave Chappelle’s run of Netflix specials is yet another master class in comedy. He holds that Detroit audience in the palm of his hand, even as he crosses lines and deliberately uses words he knows they won’t like. And that is because they trust him.
The audience trusts there isn’t any malice behind Chappelle’s jokes. Words that have so much power to hurt when uttered by people who hate are disarmed by him. Chappelle isn’t being offensive as much as he is mocking how we might believe he is that offensive of a person.
Most of Chappelle’s act has characters, who he twists into caricatures to illustrate a perspective, which is that as a Black man there’s a certain insufferable whiteness to many of the gripes that seem to define a good number of the issues of our times.
Journalists for Yahoo! News finally confirmed a narrative around Mike Pompeo and the CIA's war on WikiLeaks and its founder Julian Assange, which I outlined back in October 2019. It's an important report.
WikiLeaks' publication of "Vault 7" materials from the CIA was hugely embarrassing. Even though the CIA had increased spying operations against WikiLeaks, they still were surprised the media organization obtained a trove of the agency's extremely sensitive files.
CIA director Mike Pompeo was afraid President Donald Trump would learn about the "Vault 7" materials and think less of him. "Don’t tell him, he doesn’t need to know."
But it was too important. Trump had to be informed.