The British government has announced that the founder of Wikileaks Julian Assange
can in fact be extradited sent to the United States to stand trial
on espionage charges.
Now it isn't necessarily going to happen.
He is expected to appeal it.
This is how the legal system works, but it is far more likely to happen right now.
And for a number of people who have been legally defending Julian Sandra advocating
on his behalf for some time, this is a particularly scary move.
On the other hand, you have the Home secretary of the UK.
Pretty Patel who said that his extradition would not be incompatible with
his human rights.
Including his right to a fair trial and
a freedom of expression sounding like some sort of bizarre cyborg there in any event.
Others are incredibly worried not just about what could happen to him,
although that's a significant concern.
But about the precedent that is being set with this ongoing legal effort and
whatever the next phases could be.
You have the one of the heads of amnesty International Agnes Callamard previously
worked at the United Nations as a human rights expert.
Said that allowing Julian Assange to be extradited to the US.
Would put him at great risk and sends a chilling message to journalists the world
over and that might well be the intent.
In fact not just the effect, but they also say if the extradition proceeds amnesty
international is extremely concerned that Assange faces.
A high risk of prolonged solitary confinement which would violate
the prohibition on torture or other ill treatment,
diplomatic assurances provided by the US.
That Assange will not be kept in solitary confinement cannot be kept on face
value given previous history.
Both in terms of how he has been held in the past, but
also that's the United States, criminal justice system.
We use solitary confinement as like a standard everyday tool.
And it is just as inhumane as amnesty international is saying there.
So we have more on this, including Julian Assange's wife.
But I wanted to give both of you an opportunity to weigh in.
>> Yeah, so, this isn't about Assange person,
this is about principles that we have as a country or don't have.
So the two and I say that because look,
there's some things that Assange did later in his career that I didn't love.
Like offering $100,000 for information about stories that kind of incentivizes
you to create that evidence, whether they actually exist or not.
So, I've got some like very specific bones to pick on issues like that but
this is not about any of that.
This is about his earlier work, which was exemplary and by the way, world changing.
It's in my opinion in a lot of ways exactly what journalism is supposed to be.
So the two principles at hand here, our freedom of speech and
freedom of the press, right as as one are supposed to be our 1st Amendment.
And more importantly how Assange has been outcast from the rest of the press,
like the government picked him off because he was easier.
He didn't have a big brand, he didn't have a multi billion dollar corporation.
So he was in the New York Times or CNS.
So they go, that guy is an independent journalist and so
he won't get as much backing from the rest of the press and everybody else.
And and he caused the most amount of trouble because he's not playing ball.
The rest of the mainstream press, relatively speaking, plays ball with
the people who are powerful gives us credit for always being right.
And they write down our opinions as if it's true and I can go on and on, but
he didn't play ball.
So that's we're gonna banish him.
And in that way, we intimidate the rest of the press.
And we effectively take away freedom of the press and we beat up an outsider,
which the powerful love to do, right.
And then the second issue is even broader as John pointed out.
It's that the rest of the world now is afraid certainly portions
of their governments are afraid and their people are afraid to send us any detainee.
Whether it's about this issue or any issue because we torture people and
we do it regularly and you think, come on, really torture.
That's a strong solitary confinement is definitely tortured by
all international law, why?
Because it drives you crazy, literally,
it's not like, metaphorically kind of it was a little tough.
I mean even a limited period of time in solitary confinement,
it causes significant mental issues deterioration, etc.
So they, they've studied it, there's no question about it and
we do it at a barbaric rates.
I mean the rest of the world is barely now waking up to, America's kind of monstrous.
It's like, in the old days I was sending someone to Saudi or everything
to chop off their arms and stuff, which by the way they kind of do right.
And it's still the case unfortunately after all these years and
what America will tell you, I mean human rights and the United Nations and stuff.
No, we torture people here, we did it under Cheney and Bush that was illegal.
Until then and Obama afterwards said it is now legal.
Okay, I choose not to torture people, but it's not a crime anymore.
So now everyone people are very legitimately worried, yes, Assange will be
tortured and he'll be tortured for the crime of doing journalism.
So that's the sick six state of America today Ray Wagner.
>> Yeah, I mean that's exactly it right, Julian Assange is a journalist and
a publisher who did journalism and publishing.
And is being prosecuted by the United States government.
For the crime of exposing their crimes and
making them look bad, which is a big no apparently but
I also just want to point out that this is not like one party or the other.
This is a bipartisan attack on journalism because it started under Obama continued
under the Trump administration, even though he had praised Julian Assange.
And sort of heavily indicated that there might be some sort of pardon for him,
which never came and it's being continued under the Biden administration.
So it doesn't matter what party is in power.
This attack on journalism continues on.
>> It's also amazing, like I understand there's this thing in the media where
people just make everything about everything else.
And so I try to avoid that, but
like they've been hounding him across the face of the Earth.
For so many years and like, I don't know, did Trump try to do a coup,
I don't know, we have to get into his frame of mind.
Did he believe that it was a coup?
Did he believe that he, like the stuff that like as Jake pointed out to,
if you're powerful, well connected.
If you're considered untouchable, you can do basically whatever you want, stuff that
is far more objectively more damaging than anything that Julian Assange did.
And but on the in the case of him, like they're gonna be pursuing this if
they don't get him this time for decades, it will never end.
And I don't understand it.
In any event I want to go to some video of Stella Assange, Julian Assange,
his wife talking about this development.
>> This was always a possibility that pretty Patel would
approve sending Julian to the country that has plotted to assassinate him.
To the country that doing explodes of crimes of and
we're not at the end of the road here,
we're gonna fight this, we're gonna use
every appeal avenue and we're gonna fight.
I'm gonna spend every waking hour fighting for
Julian until he's free until justice it's served.
>> And the next steps in that path include the possibility as I alluded to earlier,
that Assange can appeal the decision at London's high court.
That would then have to give its approval for a challenge proceed.
Ultimately could reach the UK Supreme Court.
But if it's refused then he could be extradited within the next 28 days and
you know, God only knows what the timeline would be like after that.
But if he is found guilty in the end of all the 17 Espionage Act,
charges that he's facing originally brought by the Trump administration.
He faces 175 years in prison, which I that is just utter,
there's a lot that comes up day to day in the news that
just leaves you dumbfounded at the state of things.
But that is absolute madness.
Like murderers don't face.
I will never understand it.
I just, I don't understand the obsession.
Whether you like him as an individual or not.
And I think that there's plenty that he's done outside of his work that's just
reprehensible as a leftist.
Like he was perfectly happy to help a fascist get elected as president,
United States doing, untold damage to so many vulnerable communities in the US.
But this is about his work.
It is madness that you could spend a year in prison,
let alone close to two centuries.
And that should not be controversial.
I don't know why it is.
I understand inside of the news media as Jake.
So perfectly put it, but for regular people, if they pay attention to this and
it won't get talked about much, there's a good chance that they won't.
Nobody would understand why any of this works the way that it does.
>> Yeah, well, so that's gonna get to my critique of the rest of media in a second.
But first double down on what Ravana was saying.
So it's not just bipartisanship here in America.
It's every government that's dealt with this for the UK, Sweden, etc.
Whatever the American empire wants, the American empire receives,
you would like to us turn over a journalist.
Well, I mean, look again, the Saudis chopped up Jamal Khashoggi who was
a journalist for the Washington post instead.
What were threatening to end someone's life by putting them in prison for
175 years and maybe torture them for the rest of their lives, okay.
We're better marginally.
We shouldn't be marginally better then, by the way,
our allies who are chopping up journalists or
our ally that murdered journalists and serene directly right.
So, and then that gets to the rest of the press.
What are you guys doing?
I mean, you should at the White House press conferences you guys
should be going nuts over Assange and Shereen, etc.
Because that's killing journalists.
That's imprisoning journalists for doing their jobs, but
they don't view them as one of them.
They view them as the dissenters and
punishing dissent is good cuz then corporate media has even more power.
Because they don't dissent, then they get more access and
they're the only show in town and their monopoly and you better be inside the mob.
Cuz if you're not well, you got no protection, you got no campos.
You did a great journalism Assange and
expose how awful the American government was acting.
Well, maybe you shouldn't have done that, uh-huh, right.
Where the hell are you guys?
A bunch of frauds totally utterly frauds.
Okay, so back to the Trump the fraud.
You know, the person who threatened to assassinate him is Mike Pompeo working for
Donald trump.
They put together a memo about how should we murder Assange that's after she was
like, I don't know, maybe I give him a pardon.
Meanwhile he's like go and kill him.
Who cares just to do a memo on how to kill him.
Murder that guy.
He helped you anyway, you idiot, right.
But he doesn't care. He doesn't care about anybody, right.
>> There's no loyalty.
>> Yeah, of course not.
So for God's sake, just let him go already.
He's a journalist, let him go.
And the fact that everybody is an outraged by it shows you no,
they're not interested in challenge.
They're powerful.
They're interested in serving the powerful.
>> Yeah and you brought up two things I wanted to to talk about junk
which was Sharon's murder and the murder of Jamal Khashoggi.
Because I think that it's like all of these those two journalists and
Julian Assange are emblematic of the Biden administration's attack on journalism.
Because Biden is planning a trip to Saudi Arabia next month to go beg MBS for
more oil.
This is the country that murdered Jamal Khashoggi brutally violently murdered him.
And there's no repercussion seemingly from America despite the fact that
Jamal Khashoggi was a wapo reporter and an American citizen.
The same goes for Shireen Abby Martin.
Wonderful journalist asked Anthony Blinken what the United States
was going to do about it.
And he pretended that there had been no credible investigation.
That's what he said,
we don't we don't know that it was the Israeli government that killed her.
Despite the fact that by that time CNN had published their investigation that showed
that not only was she murdered by the IDF.
That it was a targeted attack that they targeted her to be murdered.
So this is just a broad attack on journalism and
it is a scary time to be a journalist when I say that.
I don't mean an establishment media talking head but
like a real journalist who uncovering actual crimes being committed globally.
>> Yeah it's always a good time to be a news actor.
The news actors never run out of work right.
But actual reporters it's very dangerous time.
Yeah Biden's a monster for what he's doing to Assange.
I don't care what all you comfortable Neil lives in Washington.
You can't call Biden a monster just because we're going to go put a journalist
in jail and and maybe torture him.
No that's the problem not me calling Biden a monster.
No but Assange was not in the elites, Biden is in the elites and
you're offending the elites.
You're a very bad person.
Do you agree with what Assange said about Trump?
I don't care what Assange said about Trump.
That's not the point of this can you concentrate.
Do you have any principles and the answer for
the powerful is as always know by the way they've already ruined the guy's life.
How many years has he spent now hiding from them?
You know whether it's in an embassy and now in under detention for
God's sake, you've done enough damage, okay.
Is it not enough?
No, for the powerful, the biggest problem in the world is dissent.
It must be criminalized and it must be punished.
But if you actually committed crimes like Trump did no you're free to go,
you wanna actually destroy democracy, you're free to go.
You're among the elites.
No consequences at all.
But you touched at least a tiny bit like Assange did that's it.
I'm gonna chase you to the end of the Earth.
That's what the ugly face of the empire looks like.