Assange supporters in Manhattan reflected on Julian Assange’s captivity and cheered his release. With Margaret Kunstler, Margaret Kimberley, Aaron Maté, Katie Halper, Joe Lauria, Jim Kavanagh and more.
Video courtesy of Assange Defense.
Organized by Nathan Fuller and Vinnie De Stefano of Assange Defense, the celebration took place at the People’s Forum on Saturday night. The speakers, in order of appearance are:
Chuck Zlatkin, NYC Free Assange
Margaret Kunstler, attorney, lead plaintiff in Kunstler v. the Central Intelligence Agency
Margaret Kimberley, editor Black Agenda Report
Aaron Maté, journalist, The Grayzone
Katie Halper, host of The Katie Halper Show
Joe Lauria, editor, Consortium News
Jim Kavanagh, The Polemicist
Michael Smith, host of Law and Disorder Radio
Vinnie De Stefano, Assange Defense
Host: Nathan Fuller, director, Assange Defense
Note: Joe Lauria’s final remark, which was cut off on the video, pointed out that the U.S. knew it was going to lose on appeal in Assange’s extradition case because the Department of Justice could not give the High Court in London an assurance that Assange would not be debarred from a free speech defense at trial by way of his nationality.
That assurance was necessary under British and European law before an extradition could take place. While the tremendous public and political pressure on the United States government softened up the U.S., it was the inability to provide this assurance that led America’s British lawyers in the case to say they could no longer continue and the U.S. to conclude it would lose on Assange’s appeal.
It was ultimately because the U.S. knew it would lose the appeal that it agreed to a plea deal with Assange.
Review. This from CN back in July.
Before she accepted Assange’s guilty plea, Judge Manglona asked him what he did to violate the law. “Working as a journalist, I encouraged my source to provide information that was said to be classified,” Assange said. “I believed the First Amendment protected that activity, but I accept that it was a violation of the espionage statute.” Assange then added, “The First Amendment was in contradiction with the Espionage Act, but I accept that it would be difficult to win such a case given all these circumstances.”
“As a result of this agreement, the Defendant will enter a plea of guilty prior to the commencement of trial, will truthfully admit his involvement in the offense and related conduct, and will not engage in conduct that is inconsistent with such acceptance of responsibility.”
His guilty plea indicates he understands how and why he is being charged. This does not mean he agrees with it. The “will not engage in conduct . . . inconsistent” appears to function as a gag order and hence (possibly) to his silence since that time. The legal implications are not clear.
“The United States has now, for the first time in the more than 100-year history of the Espionage Act, obtained an Espionage Act conviction for basic journalistic acts,” David Greene, head of civil liberties at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told The New York Times. “These charges should never have been brought.”
hxxps://consortiumnews.com/2024/07/02/assange-is-free-heres-what-hes-given-us/
You’re missing the context of that part of paragraph 11(b) of the Plea Agreement.
After the part you quote saying Assange “…will not engage in conduct that is inconsistent with such acceptance of responsibility” the next sentence limits that stipulation until the time of sentencing – which means there are no such restrictions once he was given the sentence of “time served” with no other conditions on his release and return to Australia.
The missing sentence is: “If all of these events occur, and the Defendant’s acceptance of responsibility continues through the date of sentencing, a downward adjustment of 2 levels (-2) for acceptance of responsibility will be appropriate.”
So there is no legal gag on him. Under Australia’s laws there could possibly be a secret gag on him from the security agencies and he can even be gagged from telling anyone about the gag.
Unless we hear from him soon, it might be time to hit the streets again demanding confirmation that he is actually free.
Thanks for this point. The “until the time of sentencing” is an important consideration on whether he’s “gagged” or not at this time. Which breaks down into a) whether legally gagged (apparently not); b) whether to avoid further persecution by choosing to remain silent. Given what Julian has gone through it seems to me it would not be wise for him to start in with justifications or further studies.
From page 10 of the agreement:
“The actions of the Defendant, as recounted above, were in all respects knowing and deliberate, and were not committed by mistake, accident, or other innocent reason.” (page 10)
These actions are portrayed elsewhere in the document as “conspiracy” and this specific obviously, I think, is crucial to the government’s shut-his-mouth objectives. The use of “or other innocent reason” is particularly tricky. Julian could agree to “not committed by mistake or accident,” but “innocent reason” includes exposing, whistle-blowing, and serving the public. This he did do and is his main rationale, so to deny having done so here assists the idea he was engaged in deliberate effort to do
wrong.
The question is what further he can do to avoid denial of the agreement, which would make virtually anything he might say on his case tricky and cause hesitation. This might even go so far as to thanking his supporters, if this were construed to suggest they are right in calling out a fraudulent case of press repression. In any event, following all these years of being imprisoned it’s no wonder he’s being quiet.
According to his lawyer Jennifer Robinson and his wife Stella Assange, there is no gag order. He cannot challenge his plea deal in court. He is recovering in privacy right now and to insinuate anything else is not useful.
As far as I am concerned He committed no crime. Both countries owe hin for every day he was n captivity big time.
Thank you. That sounds very likely and scary.
It’s not a holiday. It’s an attempt to rescue and repair the vicious damage done to his liberty, his health, his family etc etc etc. what happened to him was a grave injustice. I’m sorry he didn’t hold out to the end but could you? If you need a superhero then you try to be it. He’s just a man who did the right thing in a wrong world.
London has yet to answer why a man who skipped bail ended up in a cruel super max prison. Any prison would do if they simply wanted to stop him from wandering off. The. Punishment did NOT fit the crime! These super jails are misused, both in the UK and USA for political purposes, not justice.
Thank you New York. We’re. With you in spirit,, well .actually without the spirit. – but that can be rectified! Enjoy ???
Where was Julian Assange in this event?
He’s free isn’t he? This was a party without the guest of honour.
Not a single word, not even a short video of thanks or inspiration for supporters and an update on how his three month holiday is going.
He must be going to speak publicly soon. If he doesn’t then people are going to start asking whether he has been gagged by the people who wanted him locked away for life.
Good question, but first we need more information.
Did Assange know that this event was being planned?
We don’t know his health status, nor psychological status, after what he has been through.
Sending “get well” wishes to Assange for his recovery.
And who are you exactly to dictate when Julian should speak?
He will speak when he’s ready and not when you want him too. After 14yrs worth of mental torture I’d bet you’d want / need months / years to heal.
Has he not suffered enough without amateur heroes piling it on?
Just let him enjoy his life which he almost lost.
FFS! I can’t imagine the trauma he’s been through over so many years. I can imagine that having to address a meeting, albeit to celebrate his freedom, would be a bit much right now. I can also imagine that the joy of freedom and being with his loved ones will be tempered by the state of the world he finds himself in.