A free man
Julian does not look great. All puffed up.
AP Photo/Eugene Hoshiko
Julian endless war
“The goal is to use Israel to wash money out of the US and Europe taxpayers through Ukraine/Israel and back into the hands of of a transnational elite (BlackRock). The goal is an endless war, not a successful war”…
— Pelham (@Resist_05) June 25, 2024
The Crimes of Others
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805478946739245239
Gag order lift
JUST IN – Judge Juan Merchan partially lifts Trump gag order in the ‘hush money’ case before the presidential debate on Thursday pic.twitter.com/9widaLmXoO
— Overton (@OvertonLive) June 25, 2024
Final battle
“Our final battle.” This is a Trump ad worth watching! pic.twitter.com/ae3kYbACnl
— Dinesh D'Souza (@DineshDSouza) June 25, 2024
Varney
Fox News' Stuart Varney: "I was wrong about Elon Musk." pic.twitter.com/hWAvaf8YGg
— ELON DOCS (@elon_docs) June 25, 2024
The general perception is that Assange pled guilty to Espionage. John Kiriakou says he did not: “One of the things that Julian was adamant about was that he would not take a plea to an espionage charge and in the end, he did not take a plea to an espionage charge. He took a plea to a conspiracy charge and was given time served.”
According to Stella, “the deal involves her husband pleading guilty to a single charge that concerns the Espionage Act and obtaining and disclosing national defense information.”
Oh, and they had to pay $500.000 for the plane that flew him to Saipan, or he’d wind up in the US. One last American nicety. They borrowed the money.
REPORT: Julian Assange spent $500k for his flight out of the UK to avoid landing on the American homeland after he was released from prison.
Assange will instead be landing on a remote U.S. island where he will plead guilty to the charges.
The island is the U.S. territory of… pic.twitter.com/Qbp8ShwtT4
— Collin Rugg (@CollinRugg) June 25, 2024
• Assange Pleads Guilty To Espionage (RT)
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has pleaded and been found guilty in a US court to a single espionage charge. He is now free to return to his native Australia, having already served five years in a British prison. Assange pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to obtain and disseminate national defense information at the United States District Court for The Northern Mariana Islands in Saipan on Wednesday morning. He will likely be handed a 62-month prison sentence immediately afterwards, but as his five years served in London’s Belmarsh Prison will be counted towards this sentence, he will not see the inside of a jail cell. Assange was accompanied in the courtroom by Australian Ambassador to the US Kevin Rudd, Australian Ambassador to the UK Stephen Smith, and his lawyer, Jennifer Robinson. Asked by Judge Romana Manglona whether he was pleading guilty or not guilty, he responded “guilty.”
The former WikiLeaks chief told Judge Manglona that he believed that the First Amendment to the US Constitution protected his publication of classified material, and that “the First Amendment and the Espionage Act are in contradiction with each other.” However, he added that he is pleading guilty because “it would be difficult to win such a case, given all the circumstances.” The outcome of Wednesday’s hearing was widely known in advance. “We anticipate that the defendant will plead guilty to the charge…of conspiring to unlawfully obtain and disseminate classified information relating to the national defense of the United States,” the US Justice Department wrote in a letter to the court on Tuesday. “We expect [Assange] will return” to Australia after the day’s proceedings, the department added.
Assange’s 14-year fight for freedom began in 2010, when he was arrested by British police over sexual assault charges in Sweden that were later dropped, Assange jumped bail in 2012 and was granted asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy in London. He was arrested again in 2019 when Ecuador revoked his asylum, and spent the next 1,901 days in Belmarsh. The US Justice Department unsealed an indictment against Assange on the day of his arrest, charging him with 17 counts of espionage. Assange spent the next five years fighting extradition to the US, where he would have faced up to 175 years behind bars if convicted.
The charges against Assange stemmed from his publication of classified material obtained by whistleblowers, including Pentagon documents detailing alleged US war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan. The WikiLeaks founder was released from Belmarsh on Monday, two months after the Wall Street Journal reported that his lawyers were in talks with US officials about a potential plea deal. Assange was preparing to mount a final appeal against his extradition at the time, and the WSJ’s sources claimed that US President Joe Biden wanted to reach an agreement rather than deal with the “political hot potato” of a journalist arriving in Washington to face criminal prosecution so close to November’s presidential election.
“One of the things that Julian was adamant about was that he would not take a plea to an espionage charge and in the end, he did not take a plea to an espionage charge. He took a plea to a conspiracy charge and was given time served.”
• US Intel Kept Assange in UK Dungeon for Exposing War Crimes – Kiriakou (Sp.)
Press freedom advocates claimed a significant victory this week when it was announced Wikileaks founder Julian Assange would be released from prison. The journalist had been held in the UK detention facility, often called “Britain’s Guantanamo Bay,” for five years after police stormed the Ecuadorian embassy in London where he had taken refuge. The incident was a shocking turnabout after former leftist leader Rafael Correa first offered Assange asylum in 2012. The raid was reportedly spearheaded by Trump Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who drew up plans to kidnap and kill the firebrand transparency activist during his time at the Central Intelligence Agency. Although those plans never came to fruition, US intelligence remained obsessed with Assange and likely prevented his release for years, according to ex-CIA analyst John Kiriakou.
The former whistleblower joined Sputnik’s The Final Countdown program Tuesday where he discussed the surprising development with hosts Ted Rall and Angie Wong. “The pressures are immense,” said Kiriakou, who himself accepted a plea deal after being targeted by the Obama justice department for revealing the CIA’s clandestine torture program. “One of the things that Julian was adamant about was that he would not take a plea to an espionage charge and in the end, he did not take a plea to an espionage charge. He took a plea to a conspiracy charge and was given time served.” “So that’s a win.” The pursuit of Assange on espionage charges sounded alarms for press freedom advocates, who feared the Australian citizen could be sentenced to life imprisonment or even the death penalty. Such a conviction would set a dangerous precedent for journalists, who could become subject to extradition to the United States from anywhere in the world.
“One of the things that’s been fascinating to me today is to see the reaction from people across the ideological spectrum,” said Kiriakou. “The strongest support for this agreement has come from the Republican right. Very strongly supportive statements from Rand Paul, from Congressman Thomas Massie, from Tucker Carlson… Among Democrats, you’re getting the party line.” “The only interesting thing to me is the response of the neocons – so far led by Mike Pence – who is arguably one of the most irrelevant politicians in America today,” he continued. Pence’s statement on the X social media platform, which was roundly criticized by users of the site, alleged that Assange endangered the safety of US service members “in a time of war.” “Name one – literally, seriously – name one single troop whose life was put in danger because of WikiLeaks or Julian Assange’s revelations,” Kiriakou responded. “Name one. Because you can’t. What Julian Assange revealed was a series of systematic war crimes committed by the US military. That’s what he revealed.”
“..pleading guilty to a single charge that concerns the Espionage Act and obtaining and disclosing national defense information..”
• Assange Plea Deal Could Leave ‘Dent in Press Freedom’ (Sp.)
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was released from a UK prison earlier, with court documents revealing that he was expected to plead guilty to a US espionage charge as part of a plea deal with federal prosecutors.
The plea deal for Julian Assange that allowed him to walk out of the UK prison “raises some serious concerns regarding the effects on the free press,” Andy Vermaut, Editor in Chief for Belgian Indegazette.be told Sputnik. The plea bargain may require Assange to “compromise” or “give up some basic rights […] such as free speech, mobility, or ongoing monitoring, which can be regarded as concessions that erode the principles of press freedom,” said the human rights defender. If Assange is forced to agree to such things, it might end up “paving the way for future journalists and whistleblowers to be prosecuted,” Vermaut warned.Independent US presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has strongly criticized the plea deal that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was forced to accept, describing it “bad news” and a “big blow to freedom of the press. Furthermore, the plea deal “can be portrayed as a shift towards the right and away from human rights and justice.” If this is a ploy by the Biden administration, it “may appeal to liberal voters and those who support civil liberties. But this could be counterproductive if it is perceived as a calculated move rather than a move towards the principle of justice,” said the pundit. Besides Biden hoping to gain political clout from the plea deal to “woo voters” ahead of the looming presidential debate with Trump, other “geopolitical factors” may have been at play, Vermaut speculated. “The US may be trying to prevent further deterioration of diplomatic relations and regain its position as a protector of the freedom of the press,” he said.
The fact that Assange has been obliged to plead guilty to something he didn’t do may “make a dent in press freedom,” Professor Stuart Rees, Australian academic, director of The Sydney Peace Foundation and and personal friend of Julian Assange, told Sputnik. He added that it is a reminder to journalists that “they should have stood up for Assange.” As for the timing of the move, he speculated: “I think there was going to be an appeal against the extradition in the London courts, which looked to me and to others as though the Americans were going to lose that appeal.” According to the pundit, “the Americans feared the embarrassment of their appeal for extradition being lost.” The academic doubted that the plea deal would boost president Biden’s chances that much in the upcoming election campaign debate with Trump, saying:
“I think, it’ll be a ten minute wonder in terms of the debate, in terms of Biden’s chances of being reelected. There are many more forces against Biden than a fair historical decision to allow Assad’s to be free.” Julian Assange left the UK’s Belmarsh maximum security prison on June 24 having spent 1901 days there. After he was granted bail by the High Court in London, Assange boarded a plane and departed the UK. The plea hearing is expected to take place in the Northern Mariana Islands, a US Pacific territory. According to the whistleblower’s wife, Stella, the deal involves her husband pleading guilty to a single charge that concerns the Espionage Act and obtaining and disclosing national defense information. “The important thing here is that the deal involved time served, that if he signed it, he would be able to walk free,” she told reporters.
“Why Assange’s plea deal is bad news for investigative journalism..”
• Assange Is Free, But Journalism Is Not (Robert Bridge)
Julian Assange, the co-founder of WikiLeaks, has agreed to plead guilty to one count of violating the Espionage Act for his role in collecting and publishing top-secret military and diplomatic documents from 2009 to 2011. What does this verdict mean for media freedom around the world? While it’s certainly positive news that the US Department of Justice is apparently closing the book on the tragic Assange saga, it’s shocking that the administration of President Joe Biden demanded a guilty plea for the alleged crime of obtaining and publishing government secrets. After all, this is the crucial task that investigative journalists perform on a regular basis.
“The plea deal won’t have the precedential effect of a court ruling, but it will still hang over the heads of national security reporters for years to come… It’s purely symbolic,” Seth Stern, the director of advocacy for Freedom of the Press Foundation (FPF), said in a statement. “The administration could’ve easily just dropped the case but chose to instead legitimize the criminalization of routine journalistic conduct and encourage future administrations to follow suit.” Assange rose to international fame in 2010 after WikiLeaks published a series of leaks from US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. He was granted asylum by Ecuador in August 2012 on the grounds of political persecution and fears he might be extradited by the UK to the US. He remained in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London until April 2019, and then was imprisoned in Belmarsh Prison until June 2024, as the US government’s extradition effort was contested in the British courts.
While a plea deal would avoid the worst-case scenario for media liberties, it cannot be ignored that Assange was incarcerated for five years for activities that journalists engage in every day. There is good reason why the US waged a massive smear campaign against Assange, who was blessed with courage rarely seen in journalism. As the late journalist John Pilger wrote of his beleaguered colleague, who viewed his work as a moral duty: “Assange shamed his persecutors. He produced scoop after scoop. He exposed the fraudulence of wars promoted by the media and the homicidal nature of America’s wars, the corruption of dictators, the evils of Guantanamo.” The question that must be asked now is: How long can Julian Assange continue with his crusade on behalf of truth? The sole purpose for WikiLeaks is the pursuit of justice. It is about achieving justice by letting the public know what is going on, letting the average person on the street know what those who have power over their lives are conspiring to do. To say this seldom-seen method of journalism is a courageous act is the greatest understatement.
Case in point was the murder of 27-year-old Seth Rich, a former member of the Democratic National Committee who was shot and killed on the street in Washington, DC on July 10, 2016, just weeks before the presidential election between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. In an interview with the Dutch news program Nieuwsuur, Assange insinuates that Rich was responsible for the leak of DNC emails to WikiLeaks, not the Russians, as the entire US media complex had been reporting. “There’s a 27-year-old, he works for the DNC, who was shot in the back, murdered, just a few weeks ago for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington,” Assange said. “I am suggesting that our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that… We have to understand how high the stakes are in the United States and our sources take serious risks and that’s why they come to us so we can protect their anonymity.”
In an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity, he was asked: “So in other words, let me be clear… Russia did not give you the Podesta documents or anything from the DNC?” “That’s correct,” Assange responded. To better appreciate the severity of the leak, the information found in the emails caused major harm to the Clinton campaign, and has been cited as a potential contributing factor to her loss in the general election against Trump. It’s worth pondering at this point in Assange’s life whether he will continue fighting the powers that be, or take a long and much-needed vacation from the dangerous world of truth-telling. Time will tell, but I’ve got a hunch that Julian Assange has only just begun to fight.
“..nobody really takes seriously” the guilty plea as it had obviously been “coerced.”
• Assange ‘Will Always Be In Danger’ – Craig Murray (RT)
WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange is likely to carry a target on his back for many years to come, Craig Murray, a human rights activist and former British ambassador to Uzbekistan has told RT. Assange is expected to plead guilty to disseminating state secrets as part of a plea deal with US authorities and walk free later this week. He was released from a UK prison on Monday morning, bringing an end to his more than two decades-long fight against prosecution. Following his release, the 52-year-old Australian-born publisher, who spent five years at Belmarsh maximum security prison in London, boarded a plane heading to the Northern Mariana Islands, a US territory in the Pacific. He is expected to make a court appearance and be sentenced to five years – time already served, with the US dropping its extradition request. It is presumed he will then travel to Australia to be reunited with his wife and two children.
In an interview with RT on Tuesday, Murray said that despite the plea deal, Assange would remain a “marked man” and “will always be in danger” which he said was due to “the malicious forces of the CIA and the United States.” Murray suggested that “nobody really takes seriously” the guilty plea as it had obviously been “coerced.” “It is a cheap move by the Biden administration, to claim a little hollow victory for themselves,” he added. Concerns that Assange’s life could be in danger were bolstered by a Yahoo News report in 2021. The outlet claimed at the time, citing numerous intelligence sources, that senior CIA and Trump administration officials discussed the possibility of kidnapping or even killing Assange after WikiLeaks published a series of documents exposing the CIA’s cyber capabilities.
In 2022, a Spanish court issued a subpoena for Mike Pompeo, who previously served as CIA Director and Secretary of State under former President Donald Trump to give an explanation of the alleged plot. Commenting on the allegations in 2021, Pompeo said that the claims made for “pretty good fiction” and that the journalists behind the report “should write… a novel.” He also suggested that all the officials who spoke to Yahoo on the matter should be “prosecuted for speaking about classified activities.”
Wrong from the get-go: “..tell Russian President Vladimir Putin that “He’s got to come to the table and if you don’t come to the table, then we’ll give Ukrainians everything they need to kill you in the field.”
• Trump Advisers Have A Ukraine ‘Peace Plan’ – Reuters (RT)
Two key advisers to Donald Trump have drawn up a peace plan for Ukraine, should the former president be reelected this November, Reuters has reported, citing an aide to the Republican frontrunner. The plan presumably involves pressuring Kiev into negotiating with Moscow – or face a halt in military support. Trump has repeatedly vowed to end the Ukraine conflict “in 24 hours” if elected, though he has yet to unveil a detailed plan. Earlier this month, he said the US could be headed for a nuclear confrontation with Russia if President Joe Biden remains in office. In an article on Tuesday, Reuters quoted retired Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg as saying that he and his colleague, Fred Fleitz, had presented Trump with their plan, and though he did not necessarily agree with “every word of it,” his feedback was apparently positive. Both Kellog and Fleitz served as chiefs of staff in the National Security Council during Trump’s first term.
According to Kellogg, “We tell the Ukrainians: ‘You’ve got to come to the [negotiating] table, and if you don’t come to the table, support from the United States will dry up.” The US would also tell Russian President Vladimir Putin that “He’s got to come to the table and if you don’t come to the table, then we’ll give Ukrainians everything they need to kill you in the field.” The plan foresees an initial ceasefire based on the battle lines during peace negotiations, with no need for Kiev to formally cede any disputed territories to Moscow, according to Reuters. On top of this, a promise to put Ukraine’s NATO accession talks on hold would reportedly be extended to Russia. Trump spokesperson Steven Cheung, however, said that only statements made by the former president or authorized members of his campaign should be considered official.
Commenting on the Reuters article, Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told the outlet that the “value of any plan lies in the nuances and in taking into account the real state of affairs on the ground,” adding that Moscow needs to first study the purported plan. Peskov also stressed that the Russian president “recently came up with a peace initiative which unfortunately was not accepted by either the West or by the Ukrainians themselves.” Earlier this month, Putin said that Moscow is prepared to cease the hostilities immediately if Kiev withdraws its troops from the four former Ukrainian regions that voted in referendums to join Russia, as well as committing to neutrality and undergoing “demilitarization” and “denazification.”
These are not just ideas, these are demands.
• Russian Proposal Can End Ukraine Conflict – Putin (RT)
Russia’s offer for a peaceful settlement of the Ukraine conflict is a realistic way to end the hostilities, but the West is simply ignoring it, President Vladimir Putin has said. In a keynote foreign policy speech earlier this month, the Russian leader promised to order a ceasefire if Ukraine vows not to seek membership in NATO and withdraws its troops from all territories claimed by Russia. Kiev immediately rejected the proposal. In an address to an international forum hosted by Russia this week, Putin said his offer should be carefully considered by interested parties.”Unlike many Western politicians who didn’t even bother to get to the core of the initiative we proposed, participants of this forum, I expect, will study it thoughtfully and rationally and will see that it gives a real opportunity to stop the conflict and move to its political-diplomatic resolution,” a written welcome message from Putin said, as read on Tuesday by his foreign policy aide, Yury Ushakov.
Ushakov went on to say that Moscow is offering a “chance to at once stop the settlement of our differences on the battlefield and the loss of life,” adding, however, that the West wants to keep fighting Russia “to the last Ukrainian.” “For now, the West-spurred military frenzy” is not subsiding, he lamented, citing Ukraine’s missile attack last Sunday which injured over 150 civilians and claimed at least four lives at a beach in Sevastopol, Crimea.
Moscow claims that Washington shares responsibility for the strike, since Ukraine used US-supplied ATACMS missiles with cluster munition warheads. Some Russian officials have argued that American military specialists must have been directly involved in the use of the sophisticated weapon. Mikhail Podoliak, an aide to Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky, claimed that the beachgoers were “civilian occupiers.” Ushakov stated that Russia has the overarching goal of creating an indivisible pan-Eurasian security system to replace the “Euroatlantic and Eurocentric models that are passing into oblivion.” He added that it is time to seriously devise a way to ensure peace in the space “that covers Western and Eastern states and Russia in between them.” The participants of the forum – the Primakov Readings, named after the late Russian diplomat Evgeny Primakov – are among the experts who can accomplish this, Ushakov noted.
Xi knows no empty words.
• Xi Declares Intention To Resolve Ukraine Conflict (RT)
China is seeking to foster peace through diplomacy in the Russia-Ukraine conflict and opposes any attempts to escalate the hostilities or smear Beijing over its stance, President Xi Jinping has said. The US and its allies have accused China of being indirectly involved in the fighting between Moscow and Kiev by supposedly failing to curb the supply of dual-use goods to Russia. Western nations are providing weapons, training, and intelligence to Kiev, but claim they are not participants in the conflict. Speaking on Monday after talks with Polish President Andrzej Duda, who is on a state visit to China, Xi said Beijing’s goals were to “avoid the expansion and intensification of the conflict,” to deflate tensions, and to “create conditions for peace talks.” “China opposes some people who are using the excuse of normal Sino-Russian trade to divert attention and smear China,” he added.
“China is willing to continue to play a constructive role in the political settlement of the Ukrainian crisis in its own way.” Earlier this month, Switzerland hosted a “peace summit” at Kiev’s request. Russia was not invited, which prompted China to decline to participate. Duda expressed hope that Beijing will play a role in resolving the conflict “in accordance with the principles of international law.” Poland, which borders Ukraine, is among the most vocal Western supporters of Kiev. The Polish president said he had explained Warsaw’s stance to Xi, including its opposition to changing national borders by military force.
The Chinese government has rejected the Western framing of the Ukraine conflict, which has presented it as an unprovoked act of aggression by Russia. Instead, Beijing has cited NATO’s expansion in Europe as a key cause. It has also repeatedly urged other countries to drop their “Cold War mentality” and avoid “zero sum games” in foreign relations. The Polish-Chinese talks lasted for some four hours and were focused on bilateral issues, including the relaxation of visa rules and Poland’s participation in the Chinese Road and Belt initiative, according to the two leaders.
Russia will know who they are. And target them. Is that what you want? Guess so.
• Biden Likely To Allow US Contractors To Deploy In Ukraine – CNN (RT)
The administration of US President Joe Biden is reportedly “moving toward” allowing American military contractors to maintain and repair weapons systems in Ukraine. The policy change is still under review by US officials and has yet to receive final approval from Biden, CNN reported on Tuesday, citing four unidentified people familiar with the deliberations. Allowing contractors to deploy to the conflict zone is seen as one of the possible ways to “give Ukraine’s military an upper hand against Russia,” the media outlet said. Biden remains firm in his refusal to send US military forces to Ukraine, one of the sources told CNN. However, the president has repeatedly approved escalating US involvement in the conflict, including providing American tanks and long-range missiles to Kiev, despite previously stating he wouldn’t take such steps.
The possible lifting of a ban on US contractors operating inside Ukraine would be another incremental step toward direct confrontation with Russia. If approved, the latest policy change would reportedly be implemented later this year, enabling the Pentagon to sign contracts to pay potentially dozens of US companies for deploying to Ukraine. Such deployments could speed up repairs of American weapons systems used by the Kiev regime’s forces. Since the conflict began in February 2022, Biden has sought to keep Americans away from the frontlines, CNN said. “The White House has been determined to limit both the danger to Americans and the perception, particularly by Russia, that the US military is engaged in combat there.” As a result, much of the US weaponry damaged in combat has been shipped to other countries, including Poland and Romania, for repairs.
US troops also have used video chats to coach their Ukrainian counterparts on routine maintenance work, according to the report. US contractors involved in the program would be required to develop “robust risk-mitigation plans,” one official told CNN. The potential escalation in US involvement comes at a time of rising tensions between Moscow and Washington. A Ukrainian attack with US-supplied ATACMS missiles killed at least four civilians, including two children, and injured over 150 on Sunday in Sevastopol. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov pointed out that Washington not only provided the missiles, but also their complex targeting. “We understand perfectly well who is behind this,” Peskov said. He added, “Of course, the direct involvement of the United States in hostilities that result in Russian civilians being killed [will] have consequences.”
Not much will be left. And that’s the idea. Make it useless for Russia.
• Ukraine Turned Into Dumping Ground for Hazardous Waste – MoD (Sp.)
Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov said that according to available operational information, radiochemical substances continue to be imported into Ukraine for further use. “According to available operational information, the import of radiochemical substances to Ukraine for further use continues, turning the country into a dumping ground for spent nuclear fuel and waste from hazardous chemical industries,” Kirillov said. The general said the US had created of a technical and legal framework which allows it to build up its biological-military capabilities in various regions of the world. The shipping of radiochemicals to Ukraine for disposal continues, with the main routes going through Poland and Romania, and the head of the Ukrainian presidential administration overseeing the shipments, Kirillov added. In 2023, the SBU asked the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences to study samples of chemical, radiological, nuclear and bioweapons and traces of their use, he added. During the special military operation, documents were obtained from the Ukrainian armed forces confirming the Kiev regime’s interest in continuing work with weapons of mass destruction, Kirillov said.
The organizational, logistical, and financial aspects of importing radiochemical substances into Ukraine are personally overseen by Andriy Yermak, the head of Volodymyr Zelensky’s office, Kirillov said. The radiochemical substances that Western countries continue to import into Ukraine could be used to create a “dirty bomb” with its subsequent use under a “false flag,” he warned. Kirillov also named new individuals suspected of working on components of weapons of mass destruction in Ukraine, including the country’s chief medical officer Igor Kuzin. Documents confirming the US military-biological presence in Africa is rapidly expanding have been uncovered, Kirillov stated, adding that the construction of a laboratory and training centre in Ethiopia has begun under a joint programme and with financial support from the US Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) Employees of the US Army’s Institute of Infectious Diseases conducted a study on bat hantaviruses in Kenya in 2023, he said.
Israel will have to dump Bibi.
• Is Netanyahu Trying to Switch Biden for Trump? (Sp.)
Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu released a video on his social media accounts, criticizing the White House for allegedly withholding weapon shipments to his country. “During World War II, Churchill told the United States, ‘Give us the tools, we’ll do the job.’ And I say, give us the tools, and we’ll finish the job a lot faster,” Netanyahu said. Since October 7, more than 100 military aid transfers have been sent by the United States to Israel, according to the Council on Foreign Relations. The administration of President Joe Biden has also supported Israel on the international stage, vetoing multiple UN Security Council resolutions on behalf of Israel and voting with Israel in the UN General Assembly. Nevertheless, Netanyahu is willing to criticize his most adamant supporter on the world stage in hope that his possible replacement, Republican candidate and former US President Donald Trump, will be even more supportive.
“Biden is Netanyahu’s lapdog – will do anything he wants,” explained author and journalist Robert Fantina on Sputnik’s Fault Lines. “[But] Netanyahu knows that Trump will do even more if he becomes president again.” Biden has occasionally used language critical of Israel’s tactics and delayed one shipment that included 2,000lbs bombs before Israel invaded Rafah, but the vast majority of shipments continued unabated and Biden has continually stressed that he supports Israel. “So [Biden is] trying to walk this middle line, which is pleasing no one, and he doesn’t understand why it’s not pleasing everyone,” said Fantina. On the other hand, Donald Trump was extremely supportive of Israel while in office. He moved the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, a move so appreciated by Israelis that they named an illegal settlement after the former President in Golan Heights.
However, Trump has occasionally criticized Netanyahu, souring on him after the Prime Minister called to congratulate Biden on his 2020 presidential election win. He has also occasionally criticized Israel’s tactics in Gaza, but largely focused on the perception it created, rather than the plight of Palestinians suffering under those tactics. In March, Trump told an Israeli media outlet that Israel “made a very big mistake” by publicizing its actions in Gaza. “I wanted to call [Israel] and say don’t do it. These photos and shots. I mean, moving shots of bombs being dropped into buildings in Gaza. And I said, ‘Oh that’s a terrible portrait,” Trump said, adding later that Israel needs to improve its press relations tactics. “They’re being hurt very badly, I think in a public relations sense.”
Fantina argues that this isn’t a sign that Trump would reign in Netanyahu, but rather advocate for the policy of General von Moltke of Prussia (not to be confused with his nephew of the same name who led the German army in World War I), who argued that, “The greatest kindness in war is to bring it to a speedy conclusion,” a philosophy that argues a brutal short war is preferred to a long war fought in a restrained way. “[Trump] isn’t looking at international law or human rights. He’s looking at what Israel wants and how Israel can best get it,” Fatina explained. “So, it can best get it with US weapons and by changing the narrative and the optics and not letting the news see what’s happening there. So these are the things that Trump is concerned with.” “They’ve got to finish what they started, and they’ve got to finish it fast, and we have to get on with life,” Trump said in another interview in April.
“..Ukraine too is likely to take decades to actually join the EU if at all..”
• EU Formally Launches Membership Talks With Ukraine & Moldova (ZH)
A symbolic ceremony kicked off Tuesday in Luxembourg which marks the start of formal European Union accession talks for the two ex-Soviet countries of Ukraine and Moldova, putting yet more distance between them and Russia. The process will move forward, despite some recent roadblocks set by Hungary, and from here is likely to take years with nothing guaranteed in what’s expected to be a long, arduous path. “These are truly historic moments. Ukraine is and will always be part of a united Europe,” President Volodymyr Zelensky said when Ukraine was approved for the talks. “Millions of Ukrainians, and indeed generations of our people, are realizing their European dream.” Ukraine had a achieved candidate status in June 2022, but its historic and well-known corruption (with studies showing it to be among the most corrupt governments in the world), was cause for concern and surprise in some corners of Europe.
Tiny neighboring Moldova was also soon after approved for talks, as the West closely watches the situation after accusing Russia of seeking to destabilize the country’s pro-Western government, and as Russian troops are present in the breakaway region of Transnistria. But in the coming years Hungary promises to be a thorn in the side of Kiev’s aspirations. Hungarian Minister for European Affairs Janos Boka said upon arriving for what’s formally dubbed the Accession Conference: “We are still at the beginning of the screening process. It’s very difficult to say at what stage Ukraine is in. From what I see here, as we speak, they are very far from meeting the accession criteria.” Given that all 27 member countries must approve or deny whether candidate countries conform to EU laws and standards across 35 policy areas (or “chapters”) – including on trade and movement of goods, taxation, judicial, and energy and environment – there’s ample opportunity for even a single country to block the path forward at every turn.
For example EU candidate Turkey has been in talks for 20 years but to no avail. One European think tank has said Turkey’s process has been frozen by a “maze of disputes” – writing that: “Turkey has been a political challenge for the EU for more than a decade now. This stems from the widening gap between them caused by factors such as the evolution of the Turkish political model and its approach to international conflicts. As a consequence, the process of Ankara’s integration with the EU has remained frozen for years; successive reports from the European Commission evaluating its progress in the enlargement process have been strongly critical, which has only aggravated the existing disputes.” Thus Ukraine too is likely to take decades to actually join the EU if at all. A major war ravaging the country is without doubt sure to complicate things further.
“From the descriptions in the Washington Post, New York Times and virtually every mainstream media outlet, you would think that Cannon was a freak in the courtroom, raving uncontrollably at any passerby..”
• The Media Piles on Federal Judge After Lionizing Manhattan Judge (Turley)
The politicians, the press, and pundits are in a feeding frenzy around Judge Aileen Cannon, the federal judge presiding in the Florida case against former President Donald Trump. There is a torrent of hit pieces and petty attacks on virtually every media platform. What is impressive is the complete lack of self-awareness over the hypocrisy of these attacks. Just a few weeks ago, the New York Times and other media outlets went into vapors when anyone uttered criticism of Manhattan Justice Juan Merchan in another Trump case.In 2020, Judge Cannon was confirmed in a bipartisan vote, with the support of liberals such as Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) and Dianne Feinstein (D-Cal.). Now she is being denounced as a “partisan, petty prima donna, “wacko, crazy, loony, nutty, ridiculous, and outlandish,” and a “right-wing hack.”
From the descriptions in the Washington Post, New York Times and virtually every mainstream media outlet, you would think that Cannon was a freak in the courtroom, raving uncontrollably at any passerby. These critics often stress that she is an appointee of Trump, even though many Trump appointees have ruled against the former president on 2020 election issues. And these same figures denounced Trump for attacking the perceived political bias of Democratic nominees in some of his cases. Cannon was randomly selected, as opposed to Merchan, who was hand-picked to try Trump even though he is a political donor to President Joe Biden and has a daughter who is a major Democratic operative. Yet these same figures denounced those who questioned Merchan’s refusal to step aside or criticized his rulings against Trump throughout the trial. In reality, the “loose Cannon” spin is utterly disconnected with her actual rulings.
She has ruled for and against both parties on major issues. That includes the rejection of major motions filed by the Trump team and most recently challenged Trump counsel on their claims that the Special Counsel is part of “a shadow government.” Notably, when Cannon recently rejected the main motion for dismissal by the Trump team, the Washington Post buried that fact in an article titled “Judge Cannon Strikes Paragraph in Trump Classified Document Indictment.” The suggestion was that the striking of a single paragraph was more newsworthy than insisting that Trump go to trial on these counts. (Also buried in the article is a recognition that the removal of this one paragraph “does not have a substantive effect on the case.”) Most recently, the left expressed nothing short of horror that Judge Cannon allowed the Trump team to argue a point of constitutional law in a hearing.
Scholars and former prosecutors (including former attorneys general) have argued that the appointment of special counsels like Smith are unconstitutional. This is a novel and intriguing constitutional objection that is based on the text of the Constitution, which requires that high-ranking executive officers like U.S. Attorneys be appointed under statute or nominated by the president (and confirmed by the Senate). Yet after the expiration of the Independent Counsel Act in June 1999, the Justice Department asserts the right to take any private citizen like Smith and effectively give him greater authority than a U.S. Attorney. This glaring inconsistency has led to a number of challenges. Thus far, they have been unsuccessful, but none have gone to the Supreme Court. Cannon wanted to hear oral arguments before ruling on the question. That decision has sent the politicians and reporters into another frenzy of faux outrage and indignation.
MSNBC legal analyst and NYU law professor Melissa Murray went on with host Chris Hayes to tell Judge Cannon to “stay in her lane” and mock her consideration of constitutional claim: “Girl, stay in your lane. Stay. In. Your. Lane. So, yes, not only has the issue of whether the special counsel comports with the structures of constitutional law, that’s been settled. That’s been addressed in multiple courts. Settled. We don’t have to rehash that … If this were an actual issue it would ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court, not by a district court judge in Fort Pierce, Florida.” It is a baffling lecture. Cannon is precisely in her lane in hearing a claim without controlling authority. The fact is that the Supreme Court has not ruled on the issue and many lawyers have objected to the summary treatment given the claim by other courts. The point of creating a record is to allow a full review that could well end up at the Supreme Court.
Who isn’t staying in their lane? Cannon’s colleagues. The New York Times recently reported that two judges attempted to get Cannon to hand off the case when it was randomly assigned to her. So the suggestion is that two of her colleagues breached any sense of collegiality and confidentiality to contribute to a hit piece on Cannon.
It is worth noting that there was no reason for Cannon to decline the selection, particularly not due to her appointment by Trump. A variety of Trump appointees have ruled against Trump on matters without a hint of objection from the left. While it is true that Cannon was just put on the bench a couple years ago, that did not seem to bother these same pundits in the Georgia case. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee was put on the bench only shortly before being assigned the Georgia case against Trump and associates. Cannon is a true American success story and, if she were only to rule in favor of the left, she would certainly be the subject of glowing stories of how she went from being born in Cali, Colombia to joining the federal bench. Her mother escaped Cuba after the revolution and she grew up with a deep-seated faith in the rule of law. She graduated from Duke University and, after a stint as a journalist, graduated from Michigan Law School magna cum laude. Yet there will be no “American dream” stories for Cannon like the ones that ran for Sonia Sotomayor after her nomination.
Sand castle
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805513843612799291
Kitty
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805521330416038139
Teefs
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805398041152688219
Elephants
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805097515068563915
Mommy moose
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805672710409748742
Shark
https://twitter.com/i/status/1805811976352022681
Support the Automatic Earth in wartime with Paypal, Bitcoin and Patreon.
