"Russian Interference in the 2016 United States Election”, Agalarov, Article 18 UK US extradition, Assange Indictment, BGR Group, Brexit, Brexit Boys, Bryant, Club Fed, Corsi, David Duke, Ecuadar, extradition, Extradition agreement, Farage, First Amendment, Foreign interference in US election, Free Speech, hacking, Haley Barbour, Julian Assange, Mississippi, Murdoch, no First Amendment right to crack a government password, Randy Cordico, Roger Stone, Roy Cohn, Rule of Speciality, Russia, Stone indictment, Trump, Trump campaign, trump jr, Trump Tower Meeting, UK- US Extradition Agreement, WikiLeaks, William Barr
The US charges against Assange were narrow in scope, and would result in a maximum of 5 years in jail, presumably at a Club Fed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Club_Fed If he cooperates with protecting Trump and Trump’s longtime friend Roger Stone, he can expect to be pardoned, as well. This scenario appears much more in his favor than being stuck forever in the Embassy of Ecuador (as though we care), and certainly better for Ecuador. Maybe he can even shave. He reportedly wanted to go to Russia, so now he can – Russia’s US subsidiary.
Maybe he can even get sent to a low security Club Fed in the hometown of fellow Trump lovin’ Russophile Haley Barbour of BGR group, and hang out in the day drinking Mint Julep in Yazoo City Mississippi. Oh, whoops, that would have to be White Russians rather than Mint Juleps. As Mississippi Governor, Barbour became notorious for pardoning dangerous felons, who assisted him at the Governor’s mansion. Perhaps Assange supporter and fellow Russophile David Duke can drive on up from Mandeville Louisiana for the day, too. Maybe they can all hang out with the current Governor Bryant and their Brexit Boy friends, and even go to an Ole Miss game together. We kid you not. This is neither a southern novel nor short-story. It just sounds like it: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2018/08/25/absurd-brexit-mississippi-trump-russia-connection-promises-of-gold-diamond-uranium-and-data-mining
The Rule of Speciality, Article 18, means that Julian Assange would be put on trial only for the crime for which he is extradited. However, there is a caveat. The US (i.e. Trump-Bush AG William Barr) could ask the UK to approve his being tried for additional things. Notice that the narrowly defined indictment came before the Mueller report became public. You can be certain that how Article 18 is applied will be dependent upon Assange’s compliance with Trump, and perhaps Trump’s whims.
Remember the Roger Stone indictment? The following is from the indictment with Organization 1/head of Organization 1, replaced by the words Wikileaks and Assange:
“STONE’s Communications About Wikileaks During the Campaign
11. By in or around June and July 2016, STONE informed senior Trump Campaign officials that he had information indicating Wikileaks had documents whose release would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. Assange was located at all relevant times at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, United Kingdom.
12. After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Wikileaks, a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact STONE about any additional releases and what other damaging information Wikileaks had regarding the Clinton Campaign. STONE thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Wikileaks . ”
Excerpt, discussing UK associate-Trump campaign supporter: “On or about July 25, 2016, STONE sent an email to Person 1 [Corsi?] with the subject line, “Get to Assange.” The body of the message read, “Get to Assange [a]t Ecuadorian Embassy in London and get the pending Wikileaks emails … they deal with Foundation, allegedly.” On or about the same day, Person 1 forwarded STONE’s email to an associate who lived in the United Kingdom and was a supporter of the Trump Campaign ”
Assange once compared Hillary to cholera and Trump to gonorrhea. If Assange isn’t obedient, his gonorrhea could prove of the incurable variety, it appears. Playing with the bad boys carries risks. Trump’s been playing dirty since well before Assange was born. It looks like Assange, an Australian, will get off comparatively easy for helping to destroy a country which isn’t even his own – a lot like Murdoch. All because he hates Hillary more than he loves truth. Perhaps he started off with good intent before being swallowed by all-consuming hate? Too much hate to realize that cholera is better than incurable gonorrhea? Better “love in the time of cholera”.
Free speech and first amendment you say? Hacking isn’t a first amendment right, anymore than the Watergate burglary was. Free speech is under attack from all quarters, and in most countries. Non-American Assange, Wikileaks, and Russia’s abuse of our American first amendment rights put Trump in power and risks its destruction.
Even the ACLU points out that cracking a government password isn’t a first amendment right, though they raise concern about some of the language in the indictment. Read their comment here: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2019/04/13/aclus-comment-on-julian-assange-arrest/
Trump referred to Wikileaks at least 141 times during the last month of his campaign, alone, as can be heard at the link – https://youtu.be/H26hVPoCO-o
Then on April 11, 2019:
“Q Mr. President, do you still love WikiLeaks?
PRESIDENT TRUMP: I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing. And I know there is something having to do with Julian Assange. I’ve been seeing what’s happened with Assange. And that will be a determination, I would imagine, mostly by the Attorney General, who’s doing an excellent job.
So he’ll be making a determination. I know nothing really about him. It’s not my — it’s not my deal in life.
Q What would you like to see happen? What is it that your Attorney General —
PRESIDENT TRUMP: I don’t really have any opinion. I know the Attorney General will be involved in that and he’ll make a decision, okay?” https://archive.li/https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-president-trump-president-moon-jae-republic-korea-bilateral-meeting/
Gee, he’s really sounding like a mobster. He says it’s not “my thing”, i.e. Cosa Mia. Que cosa? His mentor Roy Cohn was a Cosa Nostra lawyer. Maybe Putin’s thing? Red Mafiya?
The Assange indictment is found further below, but first let’s look at Roger Stone some more. Based on the indictment and earlier filings and information, the line to Russian conspiracy and Trump-Trump campaign looks very short. Roger Stone, two assistants – apparently Jerome Corsi, and Randy Cordico, with a little help from a British Trump fan – likely a Brexit Boy. And, of course, with the help of Julian Assange, Wikileaks, and Russian hackers. Trump seemed to admit knowing that the hacks are from Russia, too, in his now infamous “Russia are you listening” statement. At the very least there appears a conspiracy between Stone, Wikileaks-Assange, Trump-Trump Campaign and others. But, it really seems to be a conspiracy undertaken while knowing that Russia is providing the hacks. It may be possible that Trump/Trump campaign were aware of the source and Wikileaks-Assange was not.
Remember, for instance, this email? “This is obviously very high level and sensitive information but is part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr. Trump – helped along by Aras and Emin” [Agalarov] (June 3, 2016, Rob Goldstone to Trump Jr.) https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2018/08/01/do-trump-jr-emails-indicate-an-ongoing-conspiracy-between-the-kremlin-and-the-trumps/
Excerpt from indictment with Wikileaks, Assange, added in brackets for clarity:
“STONE’s Communications About Organization 1 [Wikileaks] During the Campaign
11. By in or around June and July 2016, STONE informed senior Trump Campaign officials that he had information indicating Organization 1 [Wikileaks] had documents whose release would be damaging to the Clinton Campaign. The head of Organization 1 [Assange] was located at all relevant times at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, United Kingdom.
12. After the July 22, 2016 release of stolen DNC emails by Organization 1 [Wikileaks], a senior Trump Campaign official was directed to contact STONE about any additional releases and what other damaging information Organization 1 [Wikileaks] had regarding the Clinton Campaign. STONE thereafter told the Trump Campaign about potential future releases of damaging material by Organization 1. ”
Excerpt, discussing UK associate-Trump campaign supporter, names added in brackets: “On or about July 25, 2016, STONE sent an email to Person 1 with the subject line, “Get to [the head of Organization 1 [Assange] ].” The body of the message read, “Get to [the head of Organization 1 [Assange] [a]t Ecuadorian Embassy in London and get the pending [Organization 1 [Wikileaks] emails … they deal with Foundation, allegedly.” On or about the same day, Person 1 [Corsi?] forwarded STONE’s email to an associate who lived in the United Kingdom and was a supporter of the Trump Campaign ” See indictment and more here: https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2019/01/25/roger-stone-arrested-by-fbi-indictment-seems-to-confirm-conspiracy-end-appears-near/
The British go-between referenced in the indictment must have been a Brexit Boy, perhaps Nigel Farage? https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/23/when-nigel-farage-met-julian-assange Will this lead us back to Mississippi’s Governor, who seemed to be a sort of go-between for Trump and the Brexit Boys, and to the BGR Group, who have long represented Alfa Bank, and worked on the CFIUS for selling Uranium One to Russia?
Person 1 is apparently Jerome Corsi, and Person 2 is apparently Randy Credico. Organization 1 and founder of Organization 1 are clearly Wikileaks and Julian Assange.
Trump’s July 27, 2016, “Russia are you listening” statement seems to close the circle, especially assuming that the Corsi draft indictment is accurate:
C-Span link: http://youtu.be/3kxG8uJUsWU
“Russia, if you’re listening, I hope you’re able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing,” The Stone indictment notes that: “On or about June 14, 2016, the DNC—through Company 1—publicly announced that it had been hacked by Russian government actors“. Recall, in this context, the June 3, 2016 email to Trump Jr.
From the indictment against the Russian hackers, note the evening of July 27th:
“In or around 2016, the Russian Federation (“Russia”) operated a military intelligence agency called the Main Intelligence Directorate of the General Staff (“GRU”). The GRU had multiple units, including Units 26165 and 74455, engaged in cyber operations that involved the staged releases of documents stolen through computer intrusions. These units conducted large-scale cyber operations to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Defendants… were GRU officers who knowingly and intentionally conspired with each other, and with persons known and unknown to the Grand Jury (collectively the “Conspirators”), to gain unauthorized access (to “hack”) into the computers of U.S. persons and entities involved in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, steal documents from those computers, and stage releases of the stolen documents to interfere with the 2016 U.S. presidential election. 3. Starting in at least March 2016, the Conspirators used a variety of means to hack the email accounts of volunteers and employees of the U.S. presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton (the “Clinton Campaign”), including the email account of the Clinton Campaign’s chairman“. Case 1:18-cr-00215-ABJ Document 1 Filed 07/13/18 Page 1-2 of 29
“The Conspirators spearphished individuals affiliated with the Clinton Campaign throughout the summer of 2016. For example, on or about July 27, 2016, the Conspirators attempted after hours to spearphish for the first time email accounts at a domain hosted by a third-party provider and used by Clinton’s personal office. At or around the same time, they also targeted seventy-six email addresses at the domain for the Clinton Campaign Case” 1:18-cr-00215-ABJ Document 1 Filed 07/13/18 Page 7 -8 of 29 https://www.justice.gov/file/1080281/download
Excerpts from Draft indictment of Corsi, as provided to WaPo by Corsi, with names (Stone, Wikileaks, Assange) added by us: “During the interview, CORSI said that in the summer of 2016 an associate (“Person 1” [Roger Stone]) who CORSI understood to be in regular contact with senior members of the Trump Campaign, including with then-candidate Donald J. Trump, asked CORSI to get in touch with Organization 1 [Wikileaks] about materials it possessed relevant to the presidential campaign that had not already been released…”
“On or about July 25, 2016, Person 1 [Stone] sent an email to CORSI with the subject line, “Get to [the founder of Organization 1 [Assange]].” The body of the message read: “Get to [the founder of Organization 1] [a]t Ecuadorian Embassy in London and get the pending [Organization 1 [Wikileaks]] emails . . . they deal with Foundation, allegedly.” On or about the same day, CORSI forwarded Person 1’s email to the overseas individual…” UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. JEROME CORSI, Defendant. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5302125/Draft-Jerome-Corsi-statement-of-offense.pdf
From the Roger Stone indictment:
“17. On or about October 7, 2016, Organization 1 [Wikileaks] released the first set of emails stolen from the Clinton Campaign chairman. Shortly after Organization 1’s release, an associate of the high-ranking Trump Campaign official sent a text message to STONE that read “well done.”…
During his HPSCI testimony, STONE was asked, “did you discuss your conversations with the intermediary with anyone involved in the Trump campaign?” STONE falsely and misleadingly answered, “I did not.” In truth and in fact, and as described above, STONE spoke to multiple individuals involved in the Trump Campaign about what he claimed to have learned from his intermediary to Organization 1 [Wikileaks], including the following:
a. On multiple occasions, STONE told senior Trump Campaign officials about materials possessed by Organization 1 and the timing of future releases.
b. On or about October 3, 2016, STONE wrote to a supporter involved with the Trump Campaign, “Spoke to my friend in London last night. The payload is still coming.”
c. On or about October 4, 2016, STONE told a high-ranking Trump Campaign official that the head of Organization 1 had a “[s]erious security concern” but would release “a load every week going forward.“” https://miningawareness.wordpress.com/2019/01/25/roger-stone-arrested-by-fbi-indictment-seems-to-confirm-conspiracy-end-appears-near/
“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Thursday, April 11, 2019
WikiLeaks Founder Charged in Computer Hacking Conspiracy
Julian P. Assange, 47, the founder of WikiLeaks, was arrested today in the United Kingdom pursuant to the U.S./UK Extradition Treaty, in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer.
According to court documents unsealed today, the charge relates to Assange’s alleged role in one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States.
The indictment alleges that in March 2010, Assange engaged in a conspiracy with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network (SIPRNet), a U.S. government network used for classified documents and communications. Manning, who had access to the computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks. Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log on to the computers under a username that did not belong to her. Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the illegal disclosures.
During the conspiracy, Manning and Assange engaged in real-time discussions regarding Manning’s transmission of classified records to Assange. The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied, “curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”
Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. He faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison if convicted. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.
Assistant Attorney General for National Security John C. Demers, U.S. Attorney G. Zachary Terwilliger for the Eastern District of Virginia and Assistant Director in Charge Nancy McNamara of the FBI’s Washington Field Office made the announcement after the charges were unsealed. First Assistant U.S. Attorney Tracy Doherty-McCormick, Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kellen S. Dwyer, Thomas W. Traxler and Gordon D. Kromberg, and Trial Attorneys Matthew R. Walczewski and Nicholas O. Hunter of the Justice Department’s National Security Division are prosecuting the case.
The extradition will be handled by the Department of Justice’s Office of International Affairs.
An indictment contains allegations that a defendant has committed a crime. Every defendant is presumed to be innocent until and unless proven guilty in court. https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy
“From liberal beacon to a prop for Trump: what has happened to WikiLeaks? A series of hacked emails appear designed to aid Donald Trump fight back against Hillary Clinton, while raising questions about Russian involvement” https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/oct/14/wiileaks-from-liberal-beacon-to-a-prop-for-trump-what-has-happened
“Roger Stone wants to put Assange on the stand By BEN SCHRECKINGER 04/12/2019 02:15 PM EDT https://archive.li/https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/12/roger-stone-julian-assange-1272933
According to the US DOJ Web site, as updated in April 2018:
“9-15.500 – POST EXTRADITION CONSIDERATIONS—LIMITATIONS ON FURTHER PROSECUTION
Every extradition treaty limits extradition to certain offenses. As a corollary, all extradition treaties restrict prosecution or punishment of the fugitive to the offense for which extradition was granted unless (1) an offense was committed after the fugitive’s extradition or (2) the fugitive remains in the jurisdiction that requested extradition after expiration of a reasonable time (generally specified in the extradition treaty itself) following acquittal or completion of his or her punishment. This limitation is referred to as the Rule of Specialty. Federal prosecutors who wish to proceed against an extradited person on charges other than those for which extradition was granted must contact the Office of International Affairs (OIA) for guidance regarding the availability of a waiver of the Rule by the sending State.
Frequently, defendants who have been extradited to the United States attempt to dismiss or limit the government’s case against them by invoking the Rule of Specialty. There is a split in the courts on whether the defendant has standing to raise specialty: some courts hold that only a party to the Treaty (i.e., the sending State) may complain about an alleged violation of the specialty provision, other courts allow the defendant to raise the issue on his or her own behalf, and still other courts take a middle position and allow the defendant to raise the issue if it is likely that the sending State would complain as well. Whenever a defendant raises a specialty claim, the prosecutor should contact OIA for assistance in responding.
OIA attorneys are subject-matter experts on extradition, and OIA is responsible for ensuring that the government’s position in such cases remains consistent. Federal prosecutors should consult with OIA regarding issues raised by a fugitive after return to the United States regarding his or her extradition.[updated April 2018]” http://web.archive.org/web/20190405040746/https://www.justice.gov/jm/jm-9-15000-international-extradition-and-related-matters