Remarkable that the bbc website shows 1 article about the current hearings [0].<p>Meanwhile there are about 20 on Johnny Depp's recent libel case [1].<p>I'd love to see bbc reports on each day of Assange's hearings, in the sort of detail they did for Depp's case. But for some reason they are not reporting it. I wonder why?<p>[0] <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c82wm9yvv05t/julian-assange" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c82wm9yvv05t/julian-assange</a><p>[1] <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c6jx58xrrnmt/johnny-depp" rel="nofollow">https://www.bbc.com/news/topics/c6jx58xrrnmt/johnny-depp</a>
"US Government explicitly argued that all journalists are liable to prosecution under the Espionage Act (1917) for publishing classified information, citing the Rosen case."<p>...<p>The US government is now saying, completely explicitly, in court, those reporters (Daniel Ellsberg and other whistleblowers) could and should have gone to jail and that is how we will act in future. The Washington Post, the New York Times, and all the “great liberal media” of the USA are not in court to hear it and do not report it .. !
The jittery audio on the gallery link can hardly be considered public access to the proceeding. Whatever makes it on to the court transcript is not witnessed by anyone in the public, and while that's not a necessary condition for the transcript, in a case like this where the entire intelligence establishment has a huge interest in the outcome, since this is litigating the legitimacy of state secrets by proxy, it risks the credibility of the court.<p>How much exculpatory evidence is marked <unintelligible>?
"Counsel for the US government also argued that the famous Pentagon Papers supreme court judgement on the New York Times only referred to pre-publication injunction and specifically did not preclude prosecution under the Espionage Act."<p>Wow
I wonder if this turn of strategy could convince at least a part of the mainstream media to push the story.<p>the "Assange is not a journalist" take was something they liked. The "any journalist can be punished anyway" take should raise some alarms.
I suspect we would be hearing almost nothing about this case except for the "Assange warned by judge over outburst" type soundbytes if it weren't for Craig Murray.<p>Well done.
IMHO he deserves support.