Scott Horton Show - Just the Interviews - 3/21/24 Kevin Gosztola on the Potential Julian Assange Plea Deal

Episode Date: March 26, 2024

Journalist and author Kevin Gosztola was on Antiwar Radio to discuss the most recent development in the government’s war on Julian Assange — a potential plea deal. Gosztola reviews what we know about the possible deal and lays out why this should not be considered good news. Discussed on the show: “Julian Assange, Justice Department Exploring Guilty Plea to End 14-Year Legal Drama” (Wall Street Journal) Kevin Gosztola is the managing editor of Shadowproof. He also produces and co-hosts the weekly podcast, “Unauthorized Disclosure.” He is the author of Guilty of Journalism: The Political Case Against Julian Assange. Follow him on Twitter @kgosztola. This episode of the Scott Horton Show is sponsored by: Moon Does Artisan Coffee; Roberts and Robers Brokerage Incorporated; Tom Woods’ Liberty Classroom; Libertas Bella; ExpandDesigns.com/Scott. Get Scott’s interviews before anyone else! Subscribe to the Substack. Shop Libertarian Institute merch or donate to the show through Patreon, PayPal or Bitcoin: 1DZBZNJrxUhQhEzgDh7k8JXHXRjY Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

For Pacifica Radio, March the 21st, 2024, I'm Scott Horton. This is Anti-War Radio. All right, y'all welcome to show. It is anti-war radio. I'm your host, Scott Horton. I'm author of the book, Enough Already, Time to End the War on Terrorism. and I'm working on provoked how Washington started the new Cold War with Russia and the catastrophe in Ukraine. You can find my full interview archive, more than 6,000 of them now going back to 2003 at Scott Horton.org and at YouTube.com slash Scott Horton's show.

All right, you guys, next up on the show today is the great Kevin Gostola. He writes at the decenter.org, and he's the author of the book, Guilty of Journalism, the political case against Julian Assange, which is fantastic. And as you may into it there, he is an expert on the story of Julian Assange's persecution and of WikiLeaks in general. And I would say America's foremost expert and activist on behalf of the great Julian Assange. And we have important news, which is, I think it broke in the Wall Street Journal yesterday. That's where I read it, that Julian Assange's lawyers are in talks with the Department of Justice about a possible plea deal. And so, Kevin, I would like to know everything you think about that story and it's possible in potential implications here, sir.

Yeah, it was also confirmed by an independent news site called Consortium News. Joe Lurie has done some excellent work also traveling to cover the proceedings in London this past February. So it does appear to be legitimate. Now, I will say that when I read it, I see unnamed anonymous officials speaking to the Wall Street Journal. about a case that is not legitimate, that should not be pursued. And they're in talks with attorneys for the legal team for Assange, trying to get him to plead to a charge in which he should not be pleading guilty to. He's not guilty of committing any crime.

So I just think it's important to make that abundantly clear. But what they're offering is it seems a potential way out. And I don't actually understand why they feel they need. to abandon this prosecution at this stage having gone on as long as it has. I don't see why they wouldn't just let it continue to remain in limbo. Julian Assange's attorney, Barry Pollock, who's a U.S. attorney, he's not one of his lawyers in the United Kingdom, said that he has received no indication that the Justice Department would accept the deal. So all of this is just very early stage talking this story feels like a trial balloon we could get into more of

what i mean by that but it seems like this is one of those unnamed officials leaking to the press saying things that they don't want to put to any person's name to see what the reaction from the public would be it also seems like if it's true that maybe they're afraid because it's an election and everything, of course, that if they bring him here, he's going to be such a center of attention. It's part of what made him so easy to demonize in the first place, right? Is he just has this long, white hair and this, he's really tall and lanky and kind of, he's a, he could be a TV character. He could be an actor. He's an extremely charismatic, intelligent figure. Here he is a heroic journalist being persecuted by the empire, but in the land of the First Amendment,

And it's just, it's such a big deal. You could see how on a political basis, not a legal basis, because there never was a legal basis. On a political basis, it makes sense to just send him home to Australia now, Kevin. Yes, but they actually don't have to do that yet. Just to refresh people's memories, we're waiting for the United Kingdom's appeals court called the High Court of Justice to rule on whether Julian Assange can appeal the extradition, his extradition to the United States.

which was authorized by the U.K. government more than a year and a half ago. And they can use this limbo to their benefit as the U.S. government has already done. I don't think that they would have to worry about Julian Assange being extradited from the U.K. If they were able to orchestrate this in the right way, what I mean is there are justices in positions in the UK system that are deferential to the United States. They understand the politics here in the United States. And so what they can do is set, well, how about this? Let's grant him a hearing on his appeal. Let's actually let him have his day in court make it feel like he's winning. Give him a date, but give him a date in September. That's close enough to the

election where we don't have to rule on it till January. So in January 2025, we can deny his appeal. And then that saves Joe Biden or Donald Trump or anybody in the U.S. government from having to deal with Julian Assange being put on trial during an election season. It's anti-war radio. Scott Horton here talking with Kevin Gostola about Julian Assange and the leak in the Wall Street Journal about maybe they'll let him go on a misdemeanor here. Of course, you know, they don't have a legal case in the United States of America to prosecute this guy. It's the process itself is the punishment, right? He's been in pretrial detention for almost a decade now and longer if you count his imprisonment in that tiny little embassy

there in the UK. And so maybe they feel like they've got their pound of flesh, but I understand what you're saying that they don't, they could continue to drag out the process for the rest of the year, continue to punish him. They're not really, the Biden administration. They don't really have their back to the wall on this yet. So if it's a trial balloon and they want to see what we think of it, I mean, what do we think of it other than, of course, he never should have been tried? Because on one hand, obviously, we want to see Julian Assange free. And they're going to slap him on the wrist at this point after the fact here mostly and say, well, you mishandled classified information, then that's good for him. And we care about that. But on the other hand,

they're still kind of setting a precedent that they got away with prosecuting a guy for doing journalism, Kevin. Exactly, which is why I'm skeptical that Julian Assange would even go ahead and plead guilty to mishandling classified information. Because what does that mean then that you can just pressure a journalist

under the Espionage Act, charge them, and then their lawyers negotiate a plea deal to a lesser charge, But let me tell you quickly about this lesser charge. I know we have limited amount of time, but what they are thinking, what we believe they would want to have Assange plead guilty to, this mishandling of classified information, is actually a crime that Donald Trump made into a felony in 2018 because he was upset that Hillary Clinton had not been prosecuted for her use of the private email server. mishandling of classified information. So I think there's actually inaccurate reporting in this Wall Street Journal article because it's not a misdemeanor offense anymore. I'm not quite sure what charge is on the books to go after Julian Assange for mishandling classified information.

I mean, just generally speaking, U.S. citizens, non-U.S. citizens who obtain classified information and publish it. There isn't really a law against us sharing that information if we obtain it. The laws are there to govern government employees, contractors, consultants that work for the government. But beyond that, we don't have an official secrets act like the United Kingdom. Hey, y'all, Scott here. Let me tell you about Roberts & Roberts Brokerage, Inc. Who knew?

Artificial bank credit expansion leads to price inflate. and terribly distorted markets. If you've got any savings left at all, you need to protect them. You need to put some, at least, into precious metals. Well, Roberts and Roberts can set you up with the best deals on silver, gold, platinum, and palladium, and they've been doing this since 1977.

Hey, if you just need some sound advice about sound money, they're there for you, too. Call Tim Fry and the guys at 800-874-970. that's 800-874-9760 or check them out at rrbi.co that's rrbi.co you'll be glad you did hey y'all you should sign up for my substack it's scott horton show.substack.com and if you do that you'll get the interviews a day before everybody else but not only that they'll be free of commercials how do you like that pretty good huh scott hortonshow. substack.com.

Hey, y'all, libertasbella.com is where you get Scott Horton's show and Libertarian Institute shirts, sweatshirts, mugs, and stickers and things, including the great top lobstas designs as well. See, that way it says on your shirt, why you're so smart. Libertas Bella, from the same great folks who bring you ammo.com for all your ammunition needs, too. That's Libertasbella.com. Searchlight Pictures presents The Roses, only in theaters, August 29th. the director of Meet the Parents and the writer of Poor Things. Comes The Roses, starring Academy Award winner Olivia Coleman, Academy Award nominee, Benedict Cumberbatch,

Andy Sandberg, Kate McKinnon, and Allison Janney. A hilarious new comedy filled with drama, excitement, and a little bit of hatred, proving that marriage isn't always a bed of roses. See The Roses, only in theaters, August 29th. Get tickets now. Well, and although that is kind of in question, isn't it? because the espionage act of the vile Woodrow Wilson does say it's a crime for even you and I to discuss classified information. It's just it's never been applied that way because I think

the government presumes, as you and I might, that the First Amendment ultimately would prevail and any conviction under it would be overturned. But they haven't really tried it yet, right? Yeah, we're headed into untested territory. We would have to see what a court says, And I don't think we really want to learn what a court would rule. I mean, I understand why the Justice Department feels fairly confident, especially given the fact that, but we just heard from the Supreme Court in listening to this lawsuit involving social media censorship that they do believe that the U.S. government, multiple justices said, especially Khantanji, Brown Jackson said that, oh, isn't it normal for the U.S. government to go to a newspaper and coerce them or pressure them into not publishing information because it would pose a threat to national security? Isn't that not violate the First Amendment? So the Supreme Court believes that this is a power that the United States government can exercise. Yeah. Well, seriously, it is the kind of thing like, oh, good old Supreme Court, they better do the right thing because, boy, if they don't, Right. So to me, I just look at this entire conversation. And I also recall the earlier discussion that never led to anything when ambassador to Australia, U.S. Ambassador to Australia, Caroline Kennedy went there, met with a few activists. She was questioned by the Australian press, of course, because Julian Assange is an Australian citizen. And she said, well, I think there might be.

some kind of diplomatic outcome that could be possible. Well, that was taken to mean that maybe she was in a veiled manner referring to what happened with David Hicks, who was an Australian who wound up detained at Guantanamo and was eventually released after diplomatic negotiations back to his country. And yet nothing has really come of this. There is no serious confirmation. that the Justice Department is trying to give Julian Assange a way out.

And so to me, I just look at this and I think, you know, the biggest thing when I listen to all of this or think of all of these comments is Julian Assange is bringing this on himself, that the United States government is trying to work things into a way that benefits them where this is a public relations campaign. They're trying to make it seem like Julian Assange wants to martyr himself. So if he's in prison, that's his choice. He's choosing to fight this Espionage Act prosecution. He's choosing to stand up for World Press freedom. But he doesn't have to do that. He could walk free because, hey, we told the Wall Street Journal, we're open to talking to his attorneys about a plea deal. That makes a lot of sense.

It's just one more little piece of spin to protect their own side, again, for political reasons. And by the way, what do the polls say? What's the American people's opinion of Assange in his situation at this point? Do you know? Anybody asking? We don't know recently, but I can reference a morning consult poll that was done two or three years ago that I thought was fascinating. They talked to people or surveyed people in the United Kingdom, Australia, as well as the United States and a few other years. European countries, what they found in the United States wasn't very good for Julian Assange.

But half people, half of Americans had no idea who he was as a person, had never heard of Julian Assange. Jesus. Those, those who had, weren't very supportive of Julian Assange. He did not have majority support. He has majority support in Australia. And then in the UK, where this is actually unfolding, I can't say anything positive about the people in the UK either.

they were about as ignorant as the United States citizens. And, of course, liberals have been told they're supposed to hate him for helping Hillary lose in 16. And conservatives still hold a grudge against him for working with Manning to publish all the Iraq and Afghan war logs and all of that, even though they should be thanking him for that. And everybody should be thanking him for both of those things. Instead, it's reason enough to dislike him for those who, I guess, even know enough to. How's that even possible less than half the country's even heard of him? Less than half the country even pays attention to the news at all. I mean, he's in the news, right?

As I said, he's this enigmatic character, right? The long white hair and whatever they used to say, oh, he makes a perfect bond villain for the government's spin about what a horrible guy at this horrible WikiLeaks. But you're telling me the American people don't even know, you know, like he's a state capital or something. They've never heard of it. But this is just the United States of amnesia.

This is just the fact that as time passes, that's what makes this oppressive and a violation of his liberty. The fact that we're talking about alleged acts that let's just pretend like the U.S. government has gotten this correct, which I don't say they did. But let's pretend like they actually got him. He tried to break into a U.S. military computer. He put Chelsea Manning up to this. He tried to wage war on the U.S. Empire. You're doing this 15 years later. You're coming after this person, nearly 15 years later.

And that's just there can't be justice. If you're not going to charge somebody in the few years after they do the thing that you say was wrong, then it's political. It's political to almost 10 years later. later charged somebody with crimes for actions that you easily could have gone after him for because you prosecuted Manning. You put the person who was the whistleblower on trial in a military court marshal. So you could have easily just gone right to Julian Assange after that. It's not like they even claim that like, oh, we have some new scientific evidence, some new

data that came forward and that really seals the case. All it was was Pompeo wanted to. get him right it was the change of government in dc was all and and the trump people were even worse than the obama people on the issue it's just as simple as that and it's just incredible but listen i'm sorry we're out of time but thank you so much for coming on the show and keeping us up to date on this you really are the very best on this issue in this country and i sure appreciate it thanks all right you guys that is kevin got stola he is at the dissenter dot com and his book is called guilty of journalism the political case against Julian Assange.

And that's it for anti-war radio for today. I'm your host, Scott Horton. Find the full interview archive more than 6,000 of them now, going back to 2003 at Scott Horton.org. And I am here every Thursday from 230 to 3 on KPFK, 90.7 FM in L.A. See you next week.