Pamela Anderson makes 11th-hour pardon plea for WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange

Pamela Anderson is making a last-ditch attempt to snare a presidential pardon for friend and WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on the eve of a turning point in his espionage case — and she wants her fellow Americans to help.

The former “Baywatch” star, 53, thinks the US is risking the most basic tenet of democracy by accusing Assange of leaking classified information about the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. And she is speaking out — yet again — before Britain rules Monday on whether to extradite Assange to Washington to face federal charges.

“The case is simply a criminalization of a free press,” Anderson told The Post. “Julian is being charged with journalism. Documents that have exposed war crimes and human rights abuses. Now the US wants to punish him for exposing crimes.”

Assange, 49, faces 18 criminal charges tied to the public release of hundreds of thousands of secret papers handed over by already convicted ex-Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. If found guilty, the Australian — awaiting trial in a London prison after being kicked out of his hideout of almost seven years, the Ecuadorian embassy — could spend up to 175 years behind bars.

“If this extradition is successful, it will mean that no journalist is safe from prosecution,” said Anderson, who also is an AIDS and animal-rights activist. “This will set a precedent where any US journalist can be charged and sent to any country that requests their extradition. … And don’t think ‘it won’t happen to me,’ because it absolutely could, and countries will use it to silence whatever they don’t like the sound of.”

If Assange isn’t extradited, he won’t necessarily go free, according to legal experts. He could be prosecuted by Britain under its Official Secrets Act or perhaps by another US ally.

Like Anderson, Assange insists his prosecution strikes at the heart of the First Amendment — and is political retaliation for his role as a whistleblower.

But prosecutors allege the publisher is guilty of putting countless others at risk, from service members to dissidents to reporters, with his indiscriminate hacking.

Anderson, a Canadian who is now a US citizen, has lobbied President Trump for months to pardon Assange, even though Trump’s Justice Department brought the charges. In early December, she tweeted two photos of herself holding Assange posters — one in a string bikini — and tagged Trump’s official presidential handle “@POTUS please #pardonjulianassange.”

“Everyone should be asking Mr. Trump to pardon him,” she told The Post. “Anyone with influence should speak up for his freedom because it is our freedom, too. Take to Twitter and start a storm of requests.”

Assange caught Anderson’s attention a decade ago when he posted military footage of a 2007 Apache helicopter airstrike near Baghdad that killed a dozen civilians, including two Reuters journalists, and injured two children. Today, the “Collateral Murder” video has more than 17 million views on YouTube.

“It is horrific to watch,” she said, “and then to think that this is a daily and unnecessary war-time occurrence.”

The two met in 2014 at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, introduced by mutual friend and fashion designer Vivienne Westwood. In March 2019, speculation swirled that the pair were romantically involved.

Anderson last saw Assange more than a year ago — before the coronavirus outbreak — at the maximum-security HM Prison Belmarsh in southeast London, where he is being held in solitary confinement.

Assange’s lawyers and doctors maintain the months of isolation have left the journalist underweight, limping and so unfocused that he can’t even assist with his defense. They’ve repeatedly requested bail because of his poor health and vulnerability to COVID-19.

“It’s madness. He is … crammed in amongst murderers in a prison that is rife with COVID,” Anderson said. “It’s the middle of winter and it’s freezing in there and his winter clothes haven’t been delivered. The whole thing is a medieval madness.”

The ex-Playboy model told The Post that she won’t stop working on Assange’s behalf until her friend is out of prison and no longer accused of wrongdoing.

“Drop the charges. Stop this persecution of a man who was brave enough to stand up for the right thing,” she said. “We can be a part of setting him free. We just need to have the courage he had and speak up.”

https://nypost.com/2021/01/02/pamela-anderson-makes-11th-hour-pardon-plea-for-julian-assange/

>>12142216

‘Cipher accounts’ hijack Holy See’s good name

DENNIS SHANAHAN - JANUARY 3, 2021

It is becoming increasingly likely the transfer of $2.3bn to Australia since 2014 from the Vatican City is not money that belongs to the Holy See or even the Catholic Church.

It seems more likely the transfers from “the Vatican City, its entities or individuals” are being used in the name of the Vatican but not for its benefit or even with its money.

“Cipher accounts”, Vatican City accounts in name only, have been detected previously in the opaque financial management of the Holy See.

So, too, has involvement by organised crime in Vatican investments.

Since The Australian revealed details of the transfer — with a peak of $541m in one year —transparent, legitimate explanations have diminished.

First, the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference declared it had no knowledge of the transfers and none of the money was received by dioceses, charities or other Catholic entities.

The scale of the transfers, a lack of evident returns from investment, and not notifying Australian church leaders suggests the money wasn’t used to buy Australian bonds or equities.

The bishops are asking the Pope to investigate and explain the transfers. Now word is coming from the Vatican that it’s not aware of the transfers Austrac has identified as coming from Vatican City.

Unnamed officials are saying they are stunned by the report; the Vatican simply doesn’t have that sort of money to spend or invest, and they are seeking details from Australian authorities.

Legitimate and accountable transfers to Australia from the Vatican are minuscule compared to the sums Austrac has identified.

No one has suggested there has been any illegal activity or wrongdoing in the transfers — although the Australian Federal Police is still investigating some.

After Cardinal George Pell was appointed to clean up the Vatican finances in 2014, there was evidence of cipher accounts being used by people outside the Vatican and the financial council was warned of “leakage” from Holy See accounts.

As Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge has said, the lack of clarity and transparency allow for “dark speculation” which “is very unhelpful”.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/cipher-accounts-hijack-holy-sees-good-name/news-story/ad44805f2552cdca55dfdac1fd50bd91

>>12142216

Bishops want answers from Austrac

Catholic bishops are considering asking Australia’s international fin­ancial watchdog to reveal whether any of the $2.3bn sent from the Vatican City since 2014 went to Catholic organisations in Australia.

Brisbane Archbishop Mark Coleridge, president of the Australian Catholic Bishops Conference, told The Australian that asking Austrac if any of the recipients were designated as Catholic dioceses, charities or religious ­orders was an option.

The bishops are already working on a direct request to the Pope to investigate and explain how $2.3bn was transferred from the Vatican City to Australia over six years without their knowledge, amid a global financial scandal engulfing the Holy See.

In Rome, however, Vatican ­officials have also said they did not know where the money came from and denied it was from the Vatican or Vatican bank, and are also planning to ask Austrac to provide details of where the money went.

Vatican officials, who did not want to be identified, told Reuters that amount of money did not leave the Holy See after the Austrac investigation was exclusively revealed by The Australian.

Officials also said they were “absolutely stunned” by the amount of money reported and the transfers amounted to three or four times the Vatican’s annual budget.

One Vatican official told Reuters: “It’s not our money because we don’t have that kind of money.”

The official said the Vatican would be seeking details from Australian authorities on the specific origin and destination of the money.

Austrac and the Vatican have refused to comment to The Australian on the $2.3bn transfers.

The Australian Catholic bishops were already formulating a request to Francis after they were “astonished at the scale of the transfers” from the Holy See’s secretariat of state between 2014 and this year.

The Australian revealed that an official report from the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre, Austrac, had found $2.3bn had been transferred from the Vatican City over the past six years. The Australian Federal Police is investigating some of the transfers from the Vatican to Australia after a referral from Austrac. According to a report to the Senate, transfers from the Vatican to Australia rapidly increased from $71.6m in 2014 to $137.1m in 2015 before doubling again to $295m in 2016 and peaking at $581.3m in 2017.

More than $422m was transferred in 2018, $491.8m in 2019 and $294.8m in 2020.

Bishop Coleridge said: “What is certain in the middle of great uncertainties is that the Australian bishops did not know about these transfers until the disclosure and we were astonished at the scale of transfers.”

Archbishop Coleridge said he was aware of claims of the use of so-called “cipher accounts” where organisations or individuals were allowed to use Vatican City ­accounts for their own foreign investment and transfers.

Archbishop Coleridge, who served for four years from 1997 in the Vatican’s secretariat of state, said much of the organisation and finances of the Holy See were ­“obscure and Byzantine” without clarity or transparency.

“So much of this confusion is rooted in a deep culture at the Holy See and it is one of the problems Cardinal (George) Pell faced when he was appointed to the Vatican in 2014,” Archbishop Coleridge said.

In the past six months, Vatican investigators have found misuse of charitable funds and suspicious international transfers, have ­arrested individuals linked with Vatican investments and heard allegations that money was sent to Australia to adversely affect Cardinal Pell’s sexual abuse trial to derail his financial reforms as the Vatican’s treasurer. On Boxing Day, the Pope stripped the Vatican’s most powerful office of its significant ­financial assets, the secretariat of state, after having sacked Cardinal Angelo Becciu, who was an opponent to Cardinal Pell’s financial reforms.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/bishops-want-answers-from-austrac/news-story/65bdc471fea63718e49de1c57b9797d9

'A dangerous precedent': British judge to hand down Julian Assange decision

London: Julian Assange will learn within hours if he is to be extradited to the United States to face charges relating to WikiLeaks publications of a decade ago.

The 49-year-old Australian will hear his fate at London's Old Bailey on Monday evening (AEDT). He has been held in prison at Belmarsh Prison since September 2019.

His Australian lawyer Jennifer Robinson, of London's Doughty Street Chambers, told The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age that the decision would be a verdict on Britain's commitment to freedom of the press.

"This case has huge implications – for Julian Assange and his young family – and for journalists and publishers everywhere," Robinson said.

"If Assange is extradited, it will set a dangerous precedent for press freedom."

But the US government says they are prosecuting Assange, not for publishing the cables but for how they were obtained, alleging he conspired with Chelsea Manning, then an army intelligence officer, to hack into government systems to steal three-quarters of a million secret and classified cables.

He faces 17 charges and a total sentence of 175 years if convicted of all counts in the United States.

Judge Vanessa Baraitser will hand down her decision on whether Assange is to be extradited to the United States to face a grand jury. Assange, who attended every day of his hearing in September and October last year, is expected to attend the hearing in court two.

Regardless of her ruling, it will almost certainly be appealed as both sides have said they will appeal if the decision does not go their way.

Stella Moris-Smith Robertson, Assange's fiancee and mother of their two children, Max and Gabriel, has begun directly pleading with US President Donald Trump, via his favoured medium Twitter, for a pardon for Assange, before Trump leaves the White House.

The Obama administration did not bring charges against Assange – they were only brought by the Department of Justice under the Trump Administration. Trump, who benefited politically from WikiLeaks' publication of the emails obtained by Russians who hacked into the Democratic National Committee's servers, has held views in favour and also critical of WikiLeaks.

Britain's National Union of Journalists (NUJ) said if Assange was extradited to the United States, it would "chill the media worldwide".

"Whatever you think of Assange, he clearly brought important information to wide attention," the NUJ's general secretary Michelle Stainstreet said.

"Now he faces prosecution for actions that are commonplace for investigative journalists.

"If this prosecution is successful, it will chill the media worldwide."

Monday's ruling is a major development in the 10-year saga involving the Australian who spent nearly seven years holed up at the Ecuadorian embassy in London to escape being extradited to Sweden to face allegations of sexual assault.

He was kicked out by his hosts in dramatic scenes in April 2019 when they invited Scotland Yard to enter the embassy and arrest their long-term resident.

Assange has been held in custody ever since.

https://www.smh.com.au/world/europe/british-judge-to-hand-down-julian-assange-extradition-decision-20210104-p56ri5.html

—

Q Post #3764

Dec 28 2019 13:23:27 (EST)

DNC server(s).

Crowdstrike.

Did Russia 'break-in' to DNC server(s)?

Why did FBI accept 'indirect' evidence re: DNC server(s) 'hack''break-in' by Crowdstrike [Ukraine]?

Why didn't FBI 'directly' investigate DNC server(s) [in-hand]?

Download speed internal data DL vs remote? [1]

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/01/02/assange_to_hannity_our_source_was_not_the_russian_government.html

[1]

How does one provide content to WL?

>comp-to-comp

>person-to-person [1]

Personal comms [secured] prior to release? [1]

The (Source(s)):

>Feeder [1]

>Recipient [1]

Interning for the DNC can be deadly.

Does Crowdstrike possess 'gov_capablity' to trace 'break-in' route(s)?

Does Crowdstrike possess 'gov_capability' re: foreign intercepts?

Possible to layer/insert code [Crowdstrike] to designate intruder [intended target]?

NSA data_bridge DNC-Crowdstrike [bulk data collection]

Matters of National Security [Highest Levels].

FISA is only the beginning.

The hole is DEEP.

Q

>>12303339

Assange To Hannity: Source For WikiLeaks Was Not Russian Government

Ian Schwartz - January 2, 2017

In an exclusive interview with FOX News Channel's Sean Hannity the founder of WikiLeaks Julian Assange said Russia was not the source for the DNC and John Podesta hacks.

HANNITY: Can you say to the American people, unequivocally, that you did not get this information about the DNC, John Podesta's emails, can you tell the American people 1,000 percent that you did not get it from Russia or anybody associated with Russia?

JULIAN ASSANGE: Yes. We can say, we have said, repeatedly that over the last two months that our source is not the Russian government and it is not a state party.

Hannity's full interview with Assange will air Tuesday night at 10pm ET. More from the interview:

ASSANGE: Our publications had wide uptake by the American people, they're all true. But that's not the allegation that’s being presented by the Obama White House. So, why such a dramatic response? Well, the reason is obvious. They’re trying to delegitimize the Trump administration as it goes into the White House. They are trying to say that President-elect Trump is not a legitimate President…

ASSANGE: Our source is not a state party, so the answer for our interactions is no. But if we look at our most recent statement from the US government, which is on the 29th of December, OK, we had five different branches of government, Treasury, DHS, FBI, White House presenting their accusations to underpin Obama’s throwing out 29 Russian diplomats. What was missing from all of those statements? The word WikiLeaks. It’s very strange.

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/01/02/assange_to_hannity_our_source_was_not_the_russian_government.html

>>12303455

Hannity Julian Assange FULL INTERVIEW - Fox News HD 1/3/17

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gps0BYjXxac

>>12271841

Christopher Pyne: Vital US ambassador must be bold

The US ambassador is one of the most crucial roles Joe Biden will appoint for Australia, Christopher Pyne says – and we need someone to speak their mind.

Christopher Pyne - January 3, 2021

1/2

From Australia’s point of view, one of the most important first acts of the incoming administration of President-elect Joe Biden will be the early ­appointment of a high-calibre US ambassador to Australia.

The 2½-year wait that Australia endured before the most recent ambassador was appointed was unacceptable. Although I hasten to add, then charge d’affaires James Caruso did an outstanding job, acting in the role and ensuring a seamless transition from previous ambassador John Berry.

Not every US ambassador to Australia has a significant impact on the Australia-US relationship.

After only around two years in the job, the outgoing US ambassador to Australia, Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr, is one who can lay claim to leaving a legacy.

Former US ambassador Jeff Bleich is another.

Even to the extent that Bleich lent his name and financial support to the creation of the Jeff Bleich Centre for the US Alliance in Digital Technology, Security and Governance at Flinders University.

It’s establishment is a real coup for our state and Flinders University vice-chancellor Colin Stirling.

One of the positive acts of President Donald Trump was the appointment of Mr Culvahouse.

Mr Culvahouse is a well-connected Washington DC lawyer with impeccable Republican Party credentials.

He is so well regarded that he has been asked more than once to ­oversee the nomination process for Republican Party presidential candidates’ vice president selection.

Culvahouse quickly identified the number one issue that would dominate his tenure in Canberra and guided US policy in most areas around that – the relationship between ­Australia and the US in an era of great power rivalry between China and the US.

Refreshingly, Mr Culvahouse didn’t seek to gloss over the complications in this thorny issue.

He stated boldly that he would “make an assessment of efforts of third countries, third parties, to undermine (the US-Australia) relationship, and if there are such efforts, including (by) China, I will not refrain from forthrightly … speaking publicly if and as required”.

This he has done. Mr Culvahouse may well have been helped by not being a career diplomat and therefore not ­becoming used to the diplomatic language that often attends those who make a career in the foreign service.

(continued)

>>12303833

2/2

Mr Culvahouse reminded Australians that we have a very good reason to be proud of our history in defending democracy and liberty throughout the world and that, in the continuing contest between totalitarianism and freedom, we have significant assets that we could exploit more. One of these assets is our abundance of critical minerals.

These are minerals that are used in the creation of vital products that are critical to the economic wellbeing of a society, especially in national security, but are in short supply for various political or trade reasons.

They are minerals like tantalum, manganese, tungsten, cobalt, magnesium, platinum and chromium.

You might find them typically used in mobile phones, fighter jets, special kinds of steel used in the military, 3D printing of critical parts of engines and spare parts, satellites and solar power panels. There are a myriad uses for these critical minerals. They are sometimes referred to as rare earths.

Mr Culvahouse has repeatedly pointed out that the two most abundant sources of supply of rare earths are Australia and China.

Yet Australia has exported the mineral product only to have it ­altered and returned to us in the form of finished products.

This is an incredible opportunity for Australia.

The Five Eyes nations – US, Great Britain, New Zealand, Canada and Australia – are desperate to find a source of rare earths and processing of the base minerals that doesn’t ­include China in its supply chain.

So are our like-minded friends like France, Germany, the rest of the ­European Union, Japan, India, ­Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and many others.

Australia could become the sole supplier of such expensive rare earths to the Western world.

It would strengthen the West militarily and economically and remove the West’s reliance on China for what in times of tension, as we are experiencing now, is a product with national security implications.

China has made it clear in the past few months that, when wounded, they will pull the public policy lever of trade to pressure a country like ­Australia.

Mr Culvahouse argues, and he is dead right, that Australia is perfectly placed to be that reliable supplier of critical minerals, making us an even more valuable partner and supporting our economy at the same time.

He argues that we should go a step further and use government policy to ensure that Australia and the US has the processing plants in place to refine such minerals and then use them in our production chain.

While it isn’t the free-market economic policy that the centre right of politics is usually known for, in these almost-post-COVID times, when China is using its economic might to squeeze others, pragmatism should be the order of the day to ­protect our national interests.

Christopher Pyne was the federal Liberal MP for Sturt from 1993 to 2019, and served as a minister in the Howard, Abbott, Turnbull and Morrison governments. He now runs consultancy and lobbying firms GC Advisory and Pyne & Partners and writes a weekly column for The Advertiser.

https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/opinion/christopher-pyne-vital-us-ambassador-must-be-bold/news-story/c3af1b0176dfbb025e724f47e6f6fab6

>>12219001

My accuser has her eye on Jeffrey Epstein payout, says Ghislaine Maxwell

Ghislaine Maxwell has launched a “vicious” attack on one of her key accusers, claiming she fabricated allegations about Maxwell’s involvement in child sex abuse because of a “desire for cash”.

Lawyers for the British socialite have sought to cast doubt on the credibility of Annie Farmer after it emerged she could receive “millions of dollars” from a compensation fund for victims of Jeffrey Epstein, the American pedophile financier and former boyfriend of Ms Maxwell.

Ms Farmer, who claims she was abused by the couple when she was 16, is one of three women preparing to testify against Ms Maxwell this year in her criminal trial on charges of child sex trafficking and perjury. Ms Maxwell denies all the charges. She faces up to 35 years in jail if convicted.

She also intervened recently in the Briton’s failed attempt to seek bail by providing US prosecutors with a written statement in which she described Ms Maxwell as “a psychopath” who would flee the country if released.

Ms Farmer’s lawyers say Ms Maxwell, 59, is blocking any possible compensation “in retaliation” for helping to keep her behind bars.

The row has surfaced in court papers in a civil lawsuit for dam­ages that Ms Farmer has brought against Ms Maxwell and the estate of Epstein, who killed himself in prison in 2019 while awaiting trial for child sex offences.

Ms Farmer, who has waived her right to anonymity, claims she was ordered to strip and had her breasts groped by Maxwell during a visit to the financier’s ranch in New Mexico in 1996. The couple are said to have “lavished her with gifts” before Epstein allegedly assaulted her in a bedroom.

The court filings reveal that Ms Farmer, 41, a psychologist, agreed in October to an offer of payment from the Epstein Victims’ Compensation Program. It has received more than 100 claims from Epstein’s alleged victims and has reportedly paid out more than $US30m. To receive her payment, Ms Farmer is required to drop her civil claim for damages against the estate.

However, Ms Maxwell — a joint defendant in that case with Epstein’s executors — is refusing to have the action thrown out of court in New York and is demanding to know how much money Ms Farmer will receive, despite the fact the sum is meant to remain confidential.

In a letter to the court on December 23, Sigrid McCawley, Ms Farmer’s lawyer, wrote: “It is readily apparent that Maxwell is … focused on delaying Ms Farmer’s receipt of her compensation. It appears this conduct may be in retaliation for Ms Farmer’s recent submission in the bail proceedings pending before judge (Alison) Nathan as evidenced by her counsel’s statement: ‘Your client has been vocal in asking that Ms Maxwell be kept in custody.’ ”

Judge Nathan rejected Ms Maxwell’s $US28.5m bail application in the criminal proceedings last Monday. Two days later, Ms Maxwell’s lawyer, Laura Menninger, filed a missive in the civil case. “The amount of money plaintiff obtains from the Epstein program is very much a matter of public interest and will go to the very core of plaintiff’s credibility during the … criminal trial,” she wrote.

Ms Menninger said there were discrepancies in Ms Farmer’s claims, including a diary she kept of the 1996 New Mexico incident that made “zero” reference to Ms Maxwell: “The fact that plaintiff seeks money from the estate and from Ms Maxwell in the millions of dollars at the same time she is a government witness in an upcoming criminal trial on the same topic is reason enough to suspect that her newly asserted memories of abuse — without corroboration — are not based on truth or a desire for ‘justice’ so much as her desire for cash … The motive for fabrication could not be clearer.”

Last Thursday, Ms McCawley accused Ms Maxwell of “vicious victim-blaming” and said her client stood by all her allegations and “intends to testify truthfully if called in any future proceedings”.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/world/the-times/my-accuser-has-her-eye-on-jeffrey-epstein-payout-says-ghislaine-maxwell/news-story/3dc05529ce37ec1238e61130252167dc

https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/16454550/farmer-v-indyke/?filed_after=&filed_before=&entry_gte=&entry_lte=&order_by=desc

https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.526309/gov.uscourts.nysd.526309.109.0.pdf

ASIO red-flags Liberal Party donor Huifeng 'Haha' Liu over foreign interference risks

1/4

A Melbourne-based Chinese businessman who has aligned himself to prominent Liberal Party MPs is facing deportation after being assessed by ASIO as a national security risk, an ABC investigation can reveal.

The businessman, Huifeng "Haha" Liu, is a Liberal Party donor and former soldier in China's People's Liberation Army (PLA) who developed links with federal Liberal MP Gladys Liu and Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar.

Mr Liu is contesting the deportation order after the Federal Government rejected his application for permanent residency when security concerns were raised.

The Australian Federal Police (AFP) has also confirmed it is investigating Mr Liu as part of the joint ASIO-led Counter Foreign Interference Taskforce, but declined to comment further.

Mr Liu told the ABC he believed ASIO had assessed him as a security risk because he was the president of a popular Australian-Chinese neighbourhood watch organisation which had an agreement to take instructions from the Chinese consulate in Melbourne.

The group, the Australian Emergency Assistance Association Incorporated (AEAAI), acts as a middleman in police incidents and legal cases involving Chinese speakers.

The association has promoted itself as a grassroots community platform to its more than 55,000 members from the Chinese diaspora in Australia on the Chinese social media platform WeChat.

It has more than 1,000 volunteers who promise to race to the scene of incidents across Australia in a matter of minutes.

According to confidential documents obtained by the ABC, the AEAAI was promised funding from the consulate and agreed to report back on criminal incidents, emergencies, accidents and "security risks" involving Chinese citizens deemed to require consular assistance.

The AEAAI was promoted publicly by Gladys Liu (no relation), who has close links to Mr Liu.

Ms Liu helped the 52-year-old develop a relationship with Victoria Police and, by Haha Liu's account, translated for him at events with MPs and business leaders.

He also watched from the public gallery in the House of Representatives as Ms Liu delivered her maiden speech in July 2019 as MP for the federal seat of Chisholm in Melbourne's east.

Mr Liu has also ingratiated himself with Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar, the MP for the neighbouring seat of Deakin, who invited him to Parliament House to join him at his table for the 2017 Budget night dinner.

Mr Sukkar posed for photos, embracing and drinking with the political donor at a series of exclusive events between 2016 and 2018.

The Assistant Treasurer sent a Christmas card thanking him for his "friendship and support" in 2017, six months after the consulate announced its agreement with Mr Liu.

Geoffrey Watson SC, a former counsel assisting for the NSW Independent Commission for Corruption (ICAC), called on Prime Minister Scott Morrison to crack down on what he described as foreign influences within the Liberal Party.

"This shows that a person who's now thought maybe to be a person of malign influence has got access to government at the highest level, to Mr Sukkar, a minister," he said.

Mr Watson said it was time for Mr Morrison to sack Gladys Liu in response to the revelations.

"Gladys Liu has now been tied to several instances of inappropriate influence," he said.

"I am stunned that she still holds the confidence of the Prime Minister and that there haven't been actions to separate her from the Government and even from the Liberal Party itself."

Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese has called on the Government to investigate the report about Mr Liu's donations to the Liberal Party and his links with the two MPs.

"The Liberal Party needs to explain the connections which are clearly there and why it was that a senior minister of the Crown seems to have a relationship with this gentleman," Mr Albanese said on Monday.

"Michael Sukkar is a rolling problem for the Government. The only time he gets a run is in various forms of scandal …"

(continued)

>>12304790

2/4

Close contact with Liberal Party figures

The allegations about the nature of Mr Liu's activities come as he mounts a Federal Court challenge against the Immigration Minister and ASIO in a bid to remain in Australia.

The court granted him a stay on his deportation order after the minister rejected his application for a significant investor permanent residency visa on character grounds in September.

"I've done nothing wrong or against Australian law," Mr Liu told the ABC at his Melbourne home. "The decision to revoke my visa was extremely unfair."

Mr Liu has lived in Australia since at least 2014.

Sources close to Mr Liu have told the ABC he has been on ASIO's radar since at least 2016, when he had one of several meetings with the agency.

The same year, he founded the AEAAI and appeared in a photograph attending the launch of a new Australian association for Chinese PLA veterans.

The visa decision and the ongoing ASIO-AFP investigation raise questions over whether the Liberal Party and some of its MPs developed a mutually beneficial relationship with Mr Liu.

Gladys Liu and Mr Sukkar gave the Liberal Party donor access to the corridors of power, in Federal Parliament and at events with Cabinet ministers and government MPs.

In April 2017, Mr Liu and Mr Sukkar attended a private function hosted by a Liberal Party fundraising association called the Deakin 200 Club, of which the Assistant Treasurer is one of the founding members.

The Liberal Party's 2015-16 public records show that in the lead-up to the July 2016 election, Mr Liu donated $20,000 to its federal Victorian division.

In June 2016, he attended a series of pre-election fundraising events headlined by then-foreign affairs minister Julie Bishop and former prime ministers John Howard and Tony Abbott.

The same month, he officially launched the AEAAI and flooded his social media profile on the Chinese platform Weibo with photographs and posts about his encounters with senior Liberals.

He posted photos of the politicians autographing samples of products he was exporting to China. One photo shows Mr Sukkar and Mr Liu brandishing an autographed box of "hyaluronic acid collagen face masks".

In another of the photos, former prime minister John Howard is seen autographing a box of "ultra anti-wrinkle face serum" at a function organised by the Liberal Party's fundraising arm Enterprise Victoria at the exclusive Athenaeum Club.

In his Weibo posts, Mr Liu thanked Gladys Liu for translating for him with Mr Abbott, Ms Bishop and business leaders.

"Under the simultaneous interpretation from sister Liu, my speech was full of emotion," he wrote. "Tony and I talked about the election, refugees, immigration policy, and security [issues]."

In 2018, Ms Liu attended a meeting with Haha Liu in Melbourne between the AEAAI, Victoria Police and Monash City Council to discuss community safety.

It was one of a series of meetings and community forums involving the AEAAI and Victoria Police in 2018 and 2019.

And in a gesture of her ongoing support, Gladys Liu has attended and spoken at the AEAAI's annual conferences, including after her election as an MP.

Mr Liu also posted photos of events and dinners between 2016 and 2018 with Mr Sukkar, including while the MP was chair of Parliament's Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security.

"Tonight, I was invited to attend a private dinner hosted by the Assistant Treasurer of the Commonwealth of Australia Michael Sukkar," Mr Liu said in a post dated April 27, 2017. "He kept telling others that I was his old friend …"

In a statement provided to the ABC, MP Gladys Liu said her only dealings with Mr Liu were in his capacity as president of the AEAAI.

"Outside of this we have no relationship," her statement said. "Allegations made against Mr Liu are concerning and should be thoroughly investigated."

She said she had never received "financial support" from Mr Liu and was unaware of the allegations against him until contacted by the ABC.

A spokesperson for Mr Sukkar said that although the minister and Mr Liu had attended a number of the same "local events", this had not happened "in the past two- to three-year period".

He declined to answer questions about specific fundraising events.

"Mr Sukkar has never had a private meeting or conversation with Mr Liu, who is known locally not to speak English," the spokesperson said in a statement given to the ABC.

(continued)

>>12304809

3/4

The statement also said that the card received by Mr Liu was one of about 5,000 "personalised Christmas cards" sent by Mr Sukkar each year.

Mr Liu also donated $1,125 to the NSW Liberals for tickets to a Premier in Conversation event featuring Gladys Berejiklian in November 2017

It is not known if Mr Liu made any other donations to the party.

The director of the Liberal Party's Victoria division, Sam McQuestin, said Mr Liu's "financial contribution … was disclosed to the Australian Electoral Commission in accordance with our obligations under the Commonwealth Electoral Act".

Under federal electoral laws, donations under $14,300 do not have to be declared.

Mr Liu was also feted by the Victorian Labor Government, when Premier Daniel Andrews handed him an award at the 2018 retirement banquet for the outgoing parliamentary secretary for multicultural affairs, Hong Lim.

"MPs from all political parties are invited to numerous community and multi-cultural events where they are often asked to be photographed with attendees," a spokesperson for Mr Andrews said.

Street crime fears

In 2016, Haha and Gladys Liu shared a common goal to mobilise large groups from Melbourne's Chinese community on WeChat.

They both spread stories about street crime targeting the Chinese community.

At that time, Gladys Liu was a campaigner and prodigious fundraiser for the Liberal Party's Victorian division.

Haha Liu, who started with a small fashion business in Melbourne in 2014, was building a profile as a well-connected leader and protector of the Chinese community.

According to a senior member of the AEAAI leadership committee interviewed by the ABC, Haha Liu often boasted of a close connection to Gladys Liu "to give other people the impression that he is a big guy".

The ABC is protecting the committee member's identity because he fears reprisals from the Chinese Government.

"He mentioned they were old friends for a long time," he said. "He used to mention, 'we have dinners together'. Sometimes, for some events, she would invite him."

In 2016, Ms Liu told a journalist that Chinese Australians unhappy with Labor's policies were flocking to the AEAAI's groups on WeChat.

"People are so frightened about safety — and they relate that to immigration policy," she said.

"People blamed Labor for letting immigrants — especially refugees — in. So, in response to the worsening of safety, people set up WeChat groups to scare the robber away. People are scared …

"They see that police are not protecting them."

Mr Liu was beating the same drum, including in an article on local Chinese news site Yeeyi, the AEAAI's official media partner.

"Mr Liu told reporters there are incidents happening every minute in Victoria …" the article said. "However, the police force in each Melbourne jurisdiction has only a few people."

In an interview with SBS Mandarin, Mr Liu said, "we provide the police with the function of [assistance] because the police force is really limited right now."

Gladys Liu's anti-Labor campaign is credited with helping the Coalition to a razor-thin win in the 2016 federal election, held just days after the AEAAI was launched.

She targeted voters in the Melbourne electorates of Deakin and Chisholm, where the Liberals' Michael Sukkar and Julia Banks won their seats.

When the Coalition's election victory was close to being declared, Mr Liu attended media events and posed for photos with then-prime minister Malcolm Turnbull, Julia Banks, Mr Sukkar and Gladys Liu in Melbourne.

"The Australian news broadcasts were full of me and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull," Mr Liu posted on Weibo on July 9. "Congratulations to the Liberal Party and Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull for his second term in office."

A deal with the Chinese consulate

In November, Mr Liu stood down as president of the AEAAI after a fractious dispute with some of the association's leadership team, who accused him of concealing his interactions with ASIO.

"I feel betrayed, I feel angry, I feel used," said the AEAAI committee member interviewed by the ABC. "I think everybody, our normal members, have a right to know the truth behind this."

In the four-and-a-half years since it was launched, the AEAAI has built its profile as a 24/7 community service where volunteers can be reached on WeChat, over the phone, on a new mobile app and in person.

(continued)

>>12304835

4/4

Chinese citizens and Chinese Australians have been willingly giving the association's volunteers sensitive and personal details about their lives.

The group, which is registered as a non-profit with charitable purposes, assists Chinese-speaking residents to cooperate with Australian police, judiciary and emergency services in criminal incidents, emergencies, accidents, disasters and disease outbreaks.

The AEAAI has gained coverage in the mainstream media recently with stories about its army of volunteers responding to missing persons cases, robberies, and delivering supplies to residents in home quarantine during the COVID outbreak.

But what the news stories didn't say was that China's Melbourne consulate had announced the AEAAI as its official "consular protection assistance agency" in July 2017, assisting in cases where Chinese citizens needed to deal with Australian authorities.

In the announcement of the deal, Mr Liu reportedly promised to "communicate closely" with the consulate.

Confidential documents obtained by the ABC reveal the AEAAI agreed to take instructions from the consulate, report to it on incidents involving Chinese citizens and provide "security risk information".

A letter of appointment signed between the AEAAI and the consulate stipulated that "the association assigns volunteers in accordance with the Consulate-General's authorisation and clear requirements on a case-by-case basis".

It said volunteers should "assist the Consulate-General by going to the scene of an incident to understand the situation of the case, provide assistance within its capacity to Chinese citizens … and promptly report the case to the Consulate-General."

The document, which also required volunteers to abide by Australian laws, was signed in July 2017 and renewed until at least July 2020, according to members of the AEAAI leadership committee.

As part of the arrangement, the consulate agreed to fund the AEAAI's activities.

Internal communications obtained by the ABC show Mr Liu told the committee that the consulate instructed the AEAAI to establish a third-party entity to receive consular funds.

While the agreement deals with citizens living in Victoria and Tasmania, the AEAAI operates localised WeChat groups and volunteers in every state and territory.

Swinburne University China specialist Professor John Fitzgerald says Beijing sees its consular activities extending to all Chinese descendants, not only its citizens.

"While these consular offices have a duty to protect citizens from China, they have no duty and no right to interfere in Chinese-Australian community affairs," he said.

"If they're supporting an organisation which is setting out in effect to protect Chinese Australians, not just Chinese citizens, one has to ask why?

"That could be considered consular overreach … That's the business of the federal or local police forces."

The letter of appointment also stated the AEAAI should "provide security risk information to the Consulate-General in a timely manner, pass on relevant security warnings issued by the Consulate-General through WeChat groups, and assist the Consulate-General in carrying out preventive publicity activities".

The agreement stipulated that designated contact persons at the AEAAI and consulate were to "communicate and report on each case" and "report to their superiors".

Each night, an on-call night-shift volunteer "writes a formal report to be archived for future reference", according to a 2019 AEAAI document.

The terms of the arrangement with the consulate have split the AEAAI community.

"He's saying white but he is doing black," claimed one committee member who did not wish to be identified.

"Haha has been telling everyone, especially the committee members, never take a political line, never choose your side, stay away from politics.

"But it seems like he's maintaining a very good relationship with the Chinese Embassy and some local politicians."

Mr Liu told the ABC he had not committed any crime.

"I have not harmed Australia and I have not broken any laws," he said.

"If I have done anything wrong, I can accept this result, but I didn't. I believe the law will give me the justice I deserve."

China's Consulate-General in Melbourne and Embassy in Canberra did not provide a response to questions sent by the ABC.

The AEAAI also declined to respond to the ABC's questions.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-04/asio-red-flags-liberal-donor-over-foreign-interference-risks/13018938

Ugliest spectacle of Trump era looms

CAMERON STEWART - JANUARY 4, 2021

“I could never have imagined seeing these things in the greatest democracy in the world,’ says Republican Senator Mitt Romney. “Has ambition so eclipsed principle?’

It is a fair question for any moderate Republican to ask ahead of what promises to be one of the ugliest spectacles of the Donald Trump era in Congress this week (AEDT).

At the president’s urging, a group of at least 11 Republican Senators seeking to curry favour with Trump and his voting base will seek to block what should have been a routine certification of Joe Biden’s election win. They will be supported in the House by at least 120 Republicans.

The move, due to unfold in Congress on Thursday (AEDT) is, at its core, an attempt to override the will of American voters because they voted for Biden over Trump.

Luckily it will fail because Democrats and a group of more principled Republicans will combine to shoot it down in both the House and the Senate.

But this is the sort of damage that Trump’s unproven claims about a voter fraud have wreaked.

Trump’s false claims have led one third of Americans to believe that fraud helped Biden win the November election. At each turn in recent months, Trump has acted inappropriately in pressuring states such as Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, Arizona, Nevada and Wisconsin to overturn Biden’s win.

On Monday (AEDT) a recording emerged of Trump bluntly telling the Georgia secretary of state Brad Raffensperger to ‘find’ enough votes to overturn his defeat in that state.

This week a group of Republican Senators led by Ted Cruz will vote against certifying Biden’s election win unless an Electoral Commission is set up to conduct an emergency 10 day audit of the election results.

Never mind that in more than 50 cases, courts across the country have rejected all of Trump’s claims of voter fraud and that every state has now certified their results, confirming Biden’s 306 to 232 victory.

Under archaic Congressional rules, the decision to challenge the election results will force each Senator and Congressman to choose sides, placing Republicans in the position of publicly choosing between support for Trump or for the democratic process.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell, who has acknowledged Biden’s victory, warned Republicans against going down this road. But many Republicans are more fearful of angering the president and his support base than doing what is right by acknowledging the will of the people.

‘A dangerous ploy’

As Republican Senator Ben Sasse put it, the move to challenge the Biden win is ‘a dangerous ploy’ which is ‘designed to disenfranchise millions of Americans simply because they voted for someone in a different party.’

Former Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan said it was difficult to “to conceive of a more anti-democratic and anti-conservative act.’

‘The fact that this effort will fail does not mean it will not do significant damage to American democracy,” he said.

Some Republicans fear that Trump’s claims of electoral fraud may dampen the turnout of Republicans in two run-off crucial elections in Georgia on Wednesday (AEDT) which will determine what party controls the US Senate.

An editorial in the Wall Street Journal said “Republicans should be embarrassed by Mr. Trump’s Electoral College hustle,’ warning that if Congress overturned the results of the election ‘riots in the street would be the least of it.’

But there may be riots anyway. Trump is calling for his supporters to gather in Washington on the day of the vote for what he promised would be ‘wild’ protests.

Far-right groups like the Proud Boys, white nationalists and militia members have said they will also attend, all but guaranteeing clashes on the streets of the capital.

The drama that unfolds in Washington on Thursday — both inside and outside the capitol building — will mark Trump’s last stand before Biden’s inauguration on January 20.

It won’t come a moment too soon for many. Trump has wasted his final months in office by acting like a sore loser rather than a president.

Cameron Stewart has been The Australian’s Washington Correspondent covering North America since early 2017. This is his second US posting, having previously been The Australian’s New York correspondent during the late 1990s. He was previously an Associate Editor combining investigative reporting on foreign affairs, defence and national security with feature writing for the Weekend Australian Magazine. He is a former winner of the Graham Perkin Award for Australian Journalist of the Year.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/ugliest-spectacle-of-trump-era-looms/news-story/6ccc964263316a970836deb2bfb8107f

More institutions sign up for National Redress Scheme

Football NSW and the Presbyterian Church of WA are among 135 new institutions to register for the National Redress Scheme.

Swimming Australia, Tennis NSW and the Seventh-Day Adventists are among 135 new institutions to have signed up to the National Redress Scheme.

More than 440 survivors of institutional child sex abuse will have their applications for compensation processed now that the organisations have joined the scheme.

Football NSW, Missionary Sisters of the Sacred Heart of Jesus, Presbyterian Church WA and Missionaries of God’s Love also registered before their December 31, 2020 deadline.

“The significant increase in the number of institutions participating in the scheme means more applications can be progressed and survivors will not face unnecessary delays as they seek the redress which they have already waited so long to receive,” Social Services Minister Anne Ruston said.

The scheme has received more than 9100 applications for redress, with 4530 payments, totalling about $377 million, made so far.

However, 77 redress applications from survivors of institutional abuse remain unable to be processed because three institutions refuse to participate.

Jehovah’s Witnesses, Kenja Communications and Fairbridge Restored Limited were “named and shamed” in July last year for not registering for the scheme.

The institutions’ failure to join within six months of being notified of the obligation will now make the groups ineligible for government grants.

They will also face losing their charitable status.

About 450 institutions have now registered for the National Redress Scheme.

Senator Ruston said the scheme had worked with a further 11 institutions that had taken the necessary steps to join but did not meet the legislated requirements.

“The scheme and Ministers Redress Scheme Governance Board will work through how we can best support survivors with applications related to these institutions,” she said.

The board is also considering who should pay redress if a non-government organisation is defunct, the application process and the delivery of support services.

At least 540 redress offers made to survivors are awaiting confirmation from the applicant.

https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/more-institutions-sign-up-for-national-redress-scheme/news-story/d9f03224bee2a491520e449eab84cae7

—

National Redress Scheme

About the National Redress Scheme

The National Redress Scheme has been created in response to recommendations by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse listened to thousands of people about the abuse they experienced as children. The abuse happened in orphanages, Children’s Homes, schools, churches and other religious organisations, sports clubs, hospitals, foster care and other institutions.

What is the National Redress Scheme?

The National Redress Scheme:

• acknowledges that many children were sexually abused in Australian institutions

• recognises the suffering they endured because of this abuse

• holds institutions accountable for this abuse, and

• helps people who have experienced institutional child sexual abuse gain access to counselling, a direct personal response, and a Redress payment.

Would you like support?

Call the National Redress Scheme on 1800 737 377

https://www.nationalredress.gov.au/about/about-scheme

Ten former Pentagon chiefs warn Donald Trump against involving military in pursuing election fraud claims

In an extraordinary rebuke of President Donald Trump, all 10 living former secretaries of defence have cautioned against any move to involve the military in pursuing claims of election fraud.

The 10 men, a mix of Democrats and Republicans, said it would take the country into "dangerous, unlawful and unconstitutional territory."

They signed on to an opinion article published in The Washington Post that implicitly questioned Mr Trump's willingness to follow his Constitutional duty to peacefully relinquish power on January 20.

Following the November 3 election and subsequent recounts in some states, as well as unsuccessful court challenges, the outcome is clear, they wrote, while not specifying Mr Trump in the article.

"The time for questioning the results has passed; the time for the formal counting of the electoral college votes, as prescribed in the Constitution and statute, has arrived," they wrote.

The former Pentagon chiefs warned against use of the military in any effort to change the outcome.

"Efforts to involve the US armed forces in resolving election disputes would take us into dangerous, unlawful and unconstitutional territory," they wrote.

"Civilian and military officials who direct or carry out such measures would be accountable, including potentially facing criminal penalties, for the grave consequences of their actions on our republic."

A number of senior military officers, including General Mark Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, have said publicly in recent weeks the military has no role in determining the outcome of US elections and their loyalty is to the Constitution, not to an individual leader or a political party.

The 10 former Pentagon leaders also warned in their Post article of the dangers of impeding a full and smooth transition at the Defence Department prior to Inauguration Day as part of a transfer to power to president-elect Joe Biden.

Mr Biden has complained of efforts by Trump-appointed Pentagon officials to obstruct the transition.

Without mentioning a specific example, the former defence secretaries wrote that transfers of power "often occur at times of international uncertainty about US national security policy and posture," adding, "They can be a moment when the nation is vulnerable to actions by adversaries seeking to take advantage of the situation."

Tensions with Iran represent just such a moment. Sunday marked one year since the US killing of Qassem Soleimani, the top Iranian general; Iran has vowed to avenge the killing, and US officials said in recent days that they are on heightened alert for potential Iranian attack on US forces or interests in the Middle East.

In a further sign of US-Iranian tension, the acting secretary of defence, Christopher Miller, announced Sunday evening, local time, he had changed his mind about sending the Navy aircraft carrier, the USS Nimitz, home from the Middle East and instead will keep the vessel on duty.

Just last week, Mr Miller announced that he was sending the Nimitz home, a decision that had been opposed by senior military officers.

In reversing himself, Mr Miller cited "recent threats issued by Iranian leaders against President Trump and other US government officials." He did not elaborate, and the Pentagon did not respond to questions.

The opinion article in the Post was signed by Dick Cheney, William Perry, Donald Rumsfeld, William Cohen, Robert Gates, Leon Panetta, Chuck Hagel, Ash Carter, James Mattis and Mark Esper.

Mr Mattis was Mr Trump's first defence secretary; he resigned in 2018 and was succeeded by Mr Esper, who was fired just days after the November 3 election.

The Post reported that the idea for writing the opinion piece began with a conversation between Mr Cheney and Eric Edelman, a retired ambassador and former senior Pentagon official, about how Mr Trump might seek to use the military in coming days.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-04/warning-to-trump-by-10-former-pentagon-chiefs-on-election-fraud/13030236

>>12305994

All 10 living former defense secretaries: Involving the military in election disputes would cross into dangerous territory

Opinion by Ashton Carter, Dick Cheney, William Cohen, Mark Esper, Robert Gates, Chuck Hagel, James Mattis, Leon Panetta, William Perry and Donald Rumsfeld

Jan. 3, 2021

Ashton Carter, Dick Cheney, William Cohen, Mark Esper, Robert Gates, Chuck Hagel, James Mattis, Leon Panetta, William Perry and Donald Rumsfeld are the 10 living former U.S. secretaries of defense.

As former secretaries of defense, we hold a common view of the solemn obligations of the U.S. armed forces and the Defense Department. Each of us swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. We did not swear it to an individual or a party.

American elections and the peaceful transfers of power that result are hallmarks of our democracy. With one singular and tragic exception that cost the lives of more Americans than all of our other wars combined, the United States has had an unbroken record of such transitions since 1789, including in times of partisan strife, war, epidemics and economic depression. This year should be no exception.

Our elections have occurred. Recounts and audits have been conducted. Appropriate challenges have been addressed by the courts. Governors have certified the results. And the electoral college has voted. The time for questioning the results has passed; the time for the formal counting of the electoral college votes, as prescribed in the Constitution and statute, has arrived.

As senior Defense Department leaders have noted, “there’s no role for the U.S. military in determining the outcome of a U.S. election.” Efforts to involve the U.S. armed forces in resolving election disputes would take us into dangerous, unlawful and unconstitutional territory. Civilian and military officials who direct or carry out such measures would be accountable, including potentially facing criminal penalties, for the grave consequences of their actions on our republic.

Transitions, which all of us have experienced, are a crucial part of the successful transfer of power. They often occur at times of international uncertainty about U.S. national security policy and posture. They can be a moment when the nation is vulnerable to actions by adversaries seeking to take advantage of the situation.

Given these factors, particularly at a time when U.S. forces are engaged in active operations around the world, it is all the more imperative that the transition at the Defense Department be carried out fully, cooperatively and transparently. Acting defense secretary Christopher C. Miller and his subordinates — political appointees, officers and civil servants — are each bound by oath, law and precedent to facilitate the entry into office of the incoming administration, and to do so wholeheartedly. They must also refrain from any political actions that undermine the results of the election or hinder the success of the new team.

We call upon them, in the strongest terms, to do as so many generations of Americans have done before them. This final action is in keeping with the highest traditions and professionalism of the U.S. armed forces, and the history of democratic transition in our great country.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/10-former-defense-secretaries-military-peaceful-transfer-of-power/2021/01/03/2a23d52e-4c4d-11eb-a9f4-0e668b9772ba_story.html

>TRAITORS EVERYWHERE.

Julian Assange Extradition Hearing - Outside the Old Bailey

Subject Access

4 January 2021

We are Live outside the Old Bailey for the extradition hearing of Julian Assange, there are many here in support.

Julian Assange, an Australian Journalist has been held on remand in HMP Belmarsh since he was ejected from the Ecuadorian Embassy on 11/04/2019 and is awaiting a verdict on his extradition the the USA where he is wanted for 18 computer related charges. If Extradited, he faces a maximum of 10 years in prison for each Charge.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddaJE_qfDvI