[Peace-discuss] [Peace] Jonathan Turley: Julian Assange Will Be Punished for Embarrassing the DC Establishment

Sat Apr 13 19:19:54 UTC 2019

On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 12:30 PM Mildred O'brien <moboct1 at aim.com> wrote:

> "Voting" to end the Saudi war in Yemen--is not the same as ending it.
>

That's certainly very true. Congress passed the Yemen War Powers
Resolution. Now we need Trump to sign it or let it pass into law without
his signature. The last I heard Trump was expected to get the bill on
Tuesday. Then he has ten days to sign the bill, veto it, or let the bill
pass into law without his signature. Some press reports have indicated that
Trump is thinking about signing it or letting it pass into law without his
signature. Just Foreign Policy and others are doing everything we can think
of to lobby Trump to sign the bill or let it pass into law without his
signature. If you think of anything we could do that we haven't done yet to
lobby Trump to sign the bill, please let me know.

> And good luck getting Democrats to stand up for Assange.
>

Thank you for your good wishes. I'm actually not trying to get Democrats to
"stand up for Assange" - that might indeed be virtually impossible in the
context of the current and past hysterical anti-Assange Reign of Terror.
[And I use the word "hysterical" advisedly.]

I'm trying to get Democrats to stand up robustly for the First Amendment,
like the ACLU; if they do that, it will protect Assange from prosecution
for alleged actions that would be protected by the First Amendment if they
have been performed by a U.S. journalist, publisher, or editor on U.S.
soil. I think that should be easier. Not easy, clearly, but easier.
Because, you know, the First Amendment is part of the Constitution, and
protects us all - not just our rights to speak and write, but our rights to
hear and read and see and learn from others.

That is the whole idea of our alert to Congress:

Block Extradition & Prosecution of Julian Assange for First
Amendment-Protected Journalism
https://www.change.org/p/block-extradition-prosecution-of-julian-assange-for-first-amendment-protected-journalism

I liken the current juncture to August 2013, when Obama threatened to bomb
Syria without Congressional authorization. Everybody who was anybody was
sure that Obama was going to get his war, because Assad had been so
thoroughly demonized in the United States, so who was going to dare to ask
any questions or express any dissent? Surely it was a "slam dunk" that
Obama was going to get his war, as the New York Times "reported" on its
front page - it was a question of when, not if, the United States would
start bombing Syria, the NYT "reported."

But then some intrepid pioneers [clears throat] pointed out that under the
Constitution and the War Powers Resolution, the decision to use military
force belonged to Congress, not Obama; and encouraged Americans to press
their Members of Congress to speak up. And enough did, so that Obama backed
down, and went for a diplomatic deal with Russia instead.

We changed the channel from "Do you hate Assad, or are you Assad-lover?" -
where the channel did not belong - to "Do you love the Constitution and the
War Powers Resolution, or are you a Constitution-hater?" - where the
channel did belong.

And this is what we need to do now. We need to change the channel from, "Do
you hate Julian Assange, or are you an Assange-lover?" - where the channel
does not belong - to "Do you love the First Amendment, or are you a a First
Amendment - hater?" - where the channel does belong.

If we can do that - if we can change the channel to where it does belong -
we can win.

So far we have Tulsi Gabbard and Ro Khanna. We didn't have more at the
beginning, when we started to fight to end the Yemen war. Now we have a
majority of Congress, including every Democrat. It only took four years.
Hopefully, we can reclaim the First Amendment rights of Julian Assange - in
order to protect not only Julian, but to protect us all - in less than four
years.

"It's the job that's last started that takes longest to finish."

mob
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Naiman via Peace <peace at lists.chambana.net>
> To: peace <peace at lists.chambana.net>
> Sent: Sat, Apr 13, 2019 2:37 am
> Subject: [Peace] Jonathan Turley: Julian Assange Will Be Punished for
> Embarrassing the DC Establishment
>
> Given who Jonathan Turley is, this is a devastating assault on the
> persecution of Julian Assange. One thing I disagree with Turley on: his
> pessimism. If we can get Congress to vote to end the Saudi war in Yemen -
> and we did, it only took four years - we can get Congress to vote against
> the extradition of Julian Assange to stand trial for publishing actions
> protected by the First Amendment. Who knows - in two years, we might have a
> different President of the U.S. A new President of the United States could
> quash this case with the stroke of a pen.
>
> Jonathan Turley was the attorney representing the plaintiffs in the
> lawsuit of Dennis Kucinich, Walter Jones, and eight other Members of
> Congress against the Obama Administration for the unconstitutional war in
> Libya.
>
> Block Extradition & Prosecution of Julian Assange for First
> Amendment-Protected Journalism
>
> https://www.change.org/p/block-extradition-prosecution-of-julian-assange-for-first-amendment-protected-journalism
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> From: *Portside* <moderator at portside.org>
> Date: Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 10:45 PM
> Subject: Julian Assange Will Be Punished for Embarrassing the DC
> Establishment
>
> [image: The key to the prosecution of Assange has always been to punish
> him without again embarrassing the powerful figures he made mockeries of]
> <https://portside.org/>
>
> Julian Assange Will Be Punished for Embarrassing the DC Establishment
> <https://portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment>
>
>
> Jonathan Turley
> April 11, 2019
> USA Today
> <https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/04/11/wikileaks-julian-assange-nsa-extradition-hacking-chelsea-manning-nobel-column/3434034002/>
>
>    -
>    <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet/?url=https%3A//portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment&text=Julian%20Assange%20Will%20Be%20Punished%20for%20Embarrassing%20the%20DC%20Establishment>
>    -
>    <https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A//portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment>
>    -
>    <?body=%0AJulian%20Assange%20Will%20Be%20Punished%20for%20Embarrassing%20the%20DC%20Establishment%0Ahttps%3A//portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment&subject=Julian%20Assange%20Will%20Be%20Punished%20for%20Embarrassing%20the%20DC%20Establishment>
>    - <https://portside.org/node/19782/printable/print>
>
> * The key to the prosecution of Assange has always been to punish him
> without again embarrassing the powerful figures he made mockeries of *
>
> WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange in London on April 11, 2019,
> Stringer/epa-EFE
>
>
>
> He is our property
> <https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/438395-manchin-celebrates-assange-arrest-hes-our-property>.”
> Those celebratory words of Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., came on CNN soon
> after the news of the arrest of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange at the
> Ecuadorian Embassy in London.
>
> It was a sentiment shared by virtually everyone in Washington from
> Congress to the intelligence services. Assange committed the unpardonable
> sins of embarrassing the establishment — from members of Congress to
> intelligence officials to the news media. And he will now be punished for
> our sins. Despite having significant constitutional arguments to be made,
> it is likely that he will be stripped of those defenses and even barred
> from raising the overall context of his actions in federal court. What
> could be the most important free speech and free press case in our history
> could well be reduced to the scope and substance of an unauthorized
> computer access case
> <https://presto.gannettdigital.com/#!/stories/edit/65b9e085-0caf-4b52-937e-65ffdbea2184>
> .
>
> For years, the public has debated what Assange is:
> journalist, whistleblower, foreign agent, dupe. The problem is that Assange
> is first and foremost a publisher.
>
> Moreover, he was doing something that is usually heralded in the news
> media. WikiLeaks disclosed disclosed controversial intelligence and
> military operations. It later published emails that showed that the
> Democratic National Committee and the campaign of Hillary Clinton lied in
> various statements to the public, including the rigging of the primary
> for her nomination
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/07/24/here-are-the-latest-most-damaging-things-in-the-dncs-leaked-emails/?utm_term=.13842e3b28ca>.
> No one has argued that any of these emails were false. They were
> embarrassing. Of course, there is not crime of embarrassing the
> establishment, but that is merely a technicality.
>
> The criminal charge against Assange filed in a federal court was crafted
> to circumvent the obvious constitutional problems in prosecuting him. The
> charge is revealing. He is charged with a single count for his alleged
> involvement in the hacking operation of Chelsea Manning in 2010
> <https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy>
> .
>
> By alleging that Assange actively played a role in the hacking operation,
> the government is seeking to portray him as part of the theft rather than
> the distribution of the information. The prosecutors say Assange helped
> Manning secure a password to gain access to additional information. If
> true, that would be a step that most news organizations would not take.
>
> It's likely there will be a superseding indictment once Assange is
> successfully extradited to the United States. Moreover, the Justice
> Department is likely to move aggressively to strip Assange of his core
> defenses. Through what is called a motion in limine
> <https://dictionary.law.com/Default.aspx?selected=1291>, the government
> will ask the court to declare that the disclosure of intelligence
> controversies is immaterial.
>
> This would leave Assange with only the ability to challenge whether he
> helped with passwords and little or no opportunity to present evidence of
> his motivations or the threat to privacy. For the jurors, they could simply
> be faced with some Australian guy who helped with passwords in hacking
> national security information. It would be like trying a man for breaking
> and entering while barring evidence that the house was on fire and he
> thought he was rescuing people instead.
>
> They will punish Assange for their sins
>
> The key to prosecuting Assange has always been to punish him without again
> embarrassing the powerful figures made mockeries by his disclosures. That
> means to keep him from discussing how the U.S. government concealed attacks
> and huge civilian losses, the type of disclosures that were made in the
> famous Pentagon Papers case. He cannot discuss how Democratic and
> Republican members either were complicit or incompetent in their oversight.
> He cannot discuss how the public was lied to about the program.
>
> A glimpse of that artificial scope was seen within minutes of the arrest.
> CNN brought on its national security analyst, James Clapper, former
> director of national intelligence. CNN never mentioned that Clapper was accused
> of perjury
> <https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/01/19/james-clappers-perjury-dc-made-men-dont-get-charged-lying-congress-jonathan-turley-column/1045991001/> in
> denying the existence of the National Security Agency surveillance program
> and was personally implicated in the scandal that WikiLeaks triggered.
>
> Clapper was asked directly before Congress, “Does the NSA collect any type
> of data at all on millions or hundreds of millions of Americans?”
>
> Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/james-clappers-least-untruthful-statement-to-the-senate/2013/06/11/e50677a8-d2d8-11e2-a73e-826d299ff459_blog.html?utm_term=.8774c549ff9e>.”
> Later, Clapper said his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he
> could make.
>
> That would still make it a lie, of course, but this is Washington and
> people like Clapper are untouchable. In the view of the establishment,
> Assange is the problem.
>
> Washington needs to silence Assange
>
> So on CNN, Clapper was allowed to explain (without any hint of
> self-awareness or contradiction) that Assange has “caused us all kinds of
> grief in the intelligence community.” Indeed, few people seriously believe
> that the government is aggrieved about password protection. The grief was
> the disclosure operations and controversies long unknown to the American
> people. Assange will be convicted of the felony of causing embarrassment in
> the first degree.
>
> Notably, no one went to jail or was fired for the surveillance programs.
> Those in charge of failed congressional oversight were reelected. Clapper
> was never charged with perjury. Even figures shown to have lied in the
> Clinton emails, like former CNN commentator Donna Brazile (who lied about
> giving Clinton’s campaign questions in advance
> <https://www.politico.com/story/2017/03/donna-brazile-hillary-clinton-leak-regret-236184> of
> the presidential debates), are now back on television. Assange, however,
> could well do time.
>
> With Assange’s extradition, all will be well again in Washington. As
> Sen. Manchin declared, Assange is their “property” and will be punished for
> his sins. Once he is hoisted as a wretch, few will again entertain such
> hubris in the future.
>
> *Jonathan Turley, a member of USA TODAY's Board of Contributors, is the
> Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University.
> Follow him on Twitter: @JonathanTurley
> <https://twitter.com/JonathanTurley?lang=en>*
>
>    -
>    <https://twitter.com/intent/tweet/?url=https%3A//portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment&text=Julian%20Assange%20Will%20Be%20Punished%20for%20Embarrassing%20the%20DC%20Establishment>
>    -
>    <https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=https%3A//portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment>
>    -
>    <?body=%0AJulian%20Assange%20Will%20Be%20Punished%20for%20Embarrassing%20the%20DC%20Establishment%0Ahttps%3A//portside.org/2019-04-12/julian-assange-will-be-punished-embarrassing-dc-establishment&subject=Julian%20Assange%20Will%20Be%20Punished%20for%20Embarrassing%20the%20DC%20Establishment>
>    - <https://portside.org/node/19782/printable/print>
>
>
>
>
> Interpret the world and change it
>
>
> Submit via web <https://portside.org/contact/submit_to_portside>
> Submit via email <portside at portside.org>
> Frequently asked questions <https://portside.org/faq>
> Manage subscription <https://portside.org/subscribe>
> Visit portside.org <https://portside.org/>
> Twitter <https://twitter.com/portsideorg>
> Facebook <https://www.facebook.com/Portside.PortsideLabor>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Peace mailing list
> Peace at lists.chambana.net
> https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20190413/54616dd1/attachment-0001.html>