A plea bargain is reached with Julian Assange for June 26 after which he will go home to Australia

Julian Assange at the Embassy of
Ecuador in London

By Robert Willmann

Papers have been filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands indicating that a plea bargain agreement has been made with Julian Assange which is to be heard in court there on 26 June 2024, after which he is expected to go home to Australia. He has been confined since 2012, first with asylum at the Embassy of Ecuador in London, and then since 2019 at the Belmarsh Prison, where he was said to be in solitary confinement. The original bogus criminal charge against him from Sweden was dropped in 2019. The U.S. charged him in the federal Eastern District of Virginia on 6 March 2018. A long extradition process has been going on in Britain, which proceeding has been as much of a farce as the original criminal investigation out of Sweden.

The date and time in Saipan, Mariana Islands is UTC/GMT+10 hours. Here is the letter filed with the court clerk—

Here is the agreed charging document to which he will enter a plea. It is called an “information” even though the charge is a felony, because it is filed by agreement—

Material acquired by Wikileaks led by Assange revealed details about Hillary Clinton and her campaign that helped Donald Trump’s successful 2016 presidential race. But Assange was charged by an indictment while Trump was president.

The parallax view.

This entry was posted in Current Affairs, Justice, Politics and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

54 Responses to A plea bargain is reached with Julian Assange for June 26 after which he will go home to Australia

  1. morongobill says:

    Thank God Almighty, Julian is free at last.

  2. Eric Newhill says:

    This is good news. What was done to Assange is most certainly a travesty of justice. However, curious, why the U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands?

  3. TonyL says:

    “Material acquired by Wikileaks led by Assange revealed details about Hillary Clinton and her campaign that helped Donald Trump’s successful 2016 presidential race. But Assange was charged by an indictment while Trump was president.”

    It goes without saying, DJT is a deceitful POS. He praised Assange while on campaign trail.

    Regardless, Julian will be free. And that’s all it matters to him and his family. The guy has been persecuted for doing just what a real journalists should be doing (there is none that we can find nowadays).

  4. F&L says:

    Well, this is a remarkable development.

    180 degrees off topic and my apologies for that, but this 3 minute video of Zeihan carries a message so important I thought I’d try to make sure TTG has a look at it. Basically it says that 1 of only 4 Russian space satellite tracking networks was completely obliterated in the recent missile attacks (no mention of all the beachgoers – including children – killed and hospitalized but of course Zeihan is that way). It’s so serious that the Russians may already have lost their ability to make their glide-bomb tech work which they’re used recently with success. Someone who knows more than I do needs to take a look.

    Russians In Space.. well,maybe not much longer || Peter Zeihan.

    • Bill says:


      1 down, 3 more to go.

    • Eric Newhill says:

      Yes – the Ukraine war is far from over despite the perennial announcements from various anti-western/anti-US chuckleheads that Kiev will collapse next month. Even former CIA and military intelligence guys in the chucklehead club somehow seem to “forget” – or perhaps be ignorant of – all of the tools the US has yet to deploy, and all the Russian vulnerabilities not yet targeted. Wishful thinking is common currency among them. Their judgment is clouded by sparks from the personal axe they’re grinding as well as the money and craved relevancy they are receiving from Russian sources.

      • F&L says:

        You’re right.

        • Eric Newhill says:

          Thank you!

          Think about Ritter – he’s a disgrace. Arrested and convicted (twice!) for soliciting sex from underage girls, on-line nonetheless. What a doofus. Remember, he was an intelligence guy. Even if he had such impulses, he should have known he’d be caught.

          However, reborn as a pro-Russia “analyst” with disparaging things to say about the US and NATO, he is hero to the disgruntled set who, at best, errantly believe that just because the US has problems, Russia is awesome – though most of his audience are just run of the mill commies, Muslims, anarchists and generally sour antisocial personalities that like to see successful western structures undermined.

      • Keith Harbaugh says:

        Eric, unfortunately your writing above is an unfortunate combination of insults, smears, and a faulty correlation.
        The insult: “chuckleheads”.
        The smear: that their motives for their positions are strictly for personal gain, rather than what they think is best for America.
        The faulty correlation:
        “commies, Muslims, anarchists and … personalities that like to see successful western structures undermined.”
        Aside from the Muslims, such traits generally correlate with the left and the Democratic Party.
        And so does support for Ukraine.

        As an example of an unquestionably socially conservative person whose views are in alignment with your “chuckleheads”, consider

        The Democrats, both their politicians and base voters, are far more supportive of Ukraine than are Republicans.

        • Eric Newhill says:

          Sure there are always outliers. Nothing is ever 100%. We typically don’t make assessments or decisions based on absolutes. I’m talking about trends and majorities. Sorry if you don’t like it, but the “pundits” – and you know the ones I’m referring to – are indeed seeking relevancy and money, both of which they would not have if not for their pro-Russia, pro-Palestinian/pro-terrorist, pro-anything against the west stances.

          Additionally, they pander to an audience that is exactly what I said it is. At best, giving all benefit of the doubt, some percent of their audience are just plain misguided black/white thinkers -if the US has done something wrong (in their understanding) then the people against the US must be good. The US has certain problems, then it is all bad and those against it would make a better world. How many times in the comment section of LJ’s or MofA, et al does one read that the US is the cause of all evil in the world? I wish I had a nickel for every time. I’d be able to buy out Trump, Bezos and Musk simultaneously.

          The target audiences are also generally ignorant of what really goes on in the world behind the scenes. They look up to these former intelligence turned internet pundit guys to tell them the straight truth and the pundits give them more twisted propaganda. I find that to be despicable. The pundits know better, but they keep throwing cheap, albeit easily digested, slop to the trough because that grows their audience and keeps them paid.

          If you really believe it would be a better world with Russia, Chine and Iran running it and Hamas controlling Israel by numbers, I don’t know what to say other than you should move to those places now and enjoy the good life. Oh right, I know the retort, life there isn’t good because the evil US has messed with those benevolent wonderful systems. Sigh.

          And ask yourself, honestly, about how many of the pundits predictions have come true, how many of their reports have proven accurate. I keep count in my head. Their track record is not too stellar.

          It’s not fair to bring up Ritter’s poor judgment and twisted personality? Too bad. I think it’s a reflection of the man’s psychological disposition.

          • walrus says:

            Eric, if you think that the American MSM and think tanks are peddling “reality” about Russia and their SMO then I have a bridge to sell you.

            Ritter, Mc Gregor, Larry, Doctorow, Taibbi, Hersh, etc. are far more credible in my opinion than the likes of CNN, ISW, NYT, etc. all of whom have a record of publishing deliberate Government BS.

            As for Ritters alleged sexual peccadilloes, I discount them on two grounds, the first being that the CIA has a record of setting up targets with false sexual crimes (See Assange) and secondly because Ritter acknowledges it and moves on.

            On my last trip to the US, about 20 years ago, I couldn’t believe how badly informed and inward looking the Average American was regarding the rest of the world and the abysmal level of reporting and analysis of international events by the American media. I doubt that things have improved in the intervening years.

            It’s almost as if I am watching a gigantic version of “The truman show” in which the average american is deliberately kept in a bubble world and prevented from learning about the outside.

          • Eric Newhill says:

            That’s what I’m talking about, Walrus. You are a classic example of the black/white thinking. Just because CNN et al are stupid BS artists doesn’t make Ritter, Johnson, et al truth tellers.

            It is possible to have BS artist club 1 that BS’s in a certain direction and BS artist club 2 that BS’s in a different direction.

            It is also possible that BS artist club 1 has a little, but far from complete and accurate, truth and same with BS artist club 2.

            Everyone wants someone to show them the way. That is already dangerous territory; especially when that chosen someone is on the internet and not the someone with whom one has a long term personal and professional relationship. Individual psychology determines which flavor of BS people decide to at least gravitate towards, if not desperately cling to. The hardest thing for people to say is “I was wrong”. The ego is just too big, bitchy and stupid.

            Well, I sure was wrong. I initially thought that Russia was going to crush Ukraine and then wreck NATO, with destroyed economies and freezing Euros and all that jazz that the chuckleheads said was most certain.

            I rejected Col Lang and TTG’s analysis along with idiotic MSM stories. I followed Ritter, Johnson and all of some of their recommended fellow travelers, though not Martyanov, who revolts me too much. As time went on I began to question those guys and their view. Johnson flipped out, like a two year old, that anyone would dare to go against his narrative. Anyhow, I began scouring sources with opposite perspectives. Began to compare what sources were stating and predicting against actual events to which I had decent open source access. I reviewed what I know from my own experiences. I have settled on a middle ground. Usually, the right place to be because the truth is usually in the middle.

            So, as usual, you have misrepresented me. Where did I ever in 15 years +/- on this forum ever say that I trusted the mainstream media on anything?

            Out of control ego is the source of all evil and stupidity.

          • jld says:

            Out of control ego is the source of all evil and stupidity.

            Ahem… Stones… Glass house…

          • English Outsider says:

            Eric – Larry Johnson is a sober and well-informed American commentator. He used to submit articles here. I think it’s a mistake to discount the views of such because not all agree with those views.

            I don’t like what he has to say about my country and the Assange case either. He says it as 7.30 here and you’ll see it’s pretty sharp. But like it or not, what he says in in accordance with the facts. And if we are to have our faults examined, better by a friend than an enemy.

            Though I’m not sure how much of a friend Larry Johnson is, given that judging from his web site his family’s enmity to my country reaches back more than a couple of centuries!

            But seriously. I’m listening to a recent interview at the moment. All that he says, however uncomfortable, is accurate. We should listen. He knows what he’s talking about.


          • LeaNder says:

            Ahem… Stones… Glass house…

            Yes, the image of stone & glasshouse may describe the vain pleasure that the fixed image of the enemy and thus psychological projection provides, pure white and cleanness inside all blackness dirt out there.

            But over the years and decades, almost everyone here showed bits and pieces of his non-rational other, his own set of defense mechanism hardened into bits of ideology. Including the seemingly more intelligent of our human pilgrim zoo.

            jld, I only got bits and pieces of this ongoing affair lately. But yes, glasshouse is pretty appropriate.

          • Eric Newhill says:

            The “facts”? What facts?

            I don’t know what the complete and accurate “facts” are and neither do you. And neither do Johnson, Ritter, McGregor or any of those guys.

            I can however track their predictions against reality, and they aren’t doing very well.

            I can also examine their attitudes on display on their various forums. I find them to be hateful of their own countries and worshipful of adversaries. I don’t think that is a subjective perception.

        • Eric Newhill says:

          Ritter is on tour selling his books in Russia. The same books barely sell in the US. Is he really going to be critical of Russia? Is he really going to praise the US?

          Go read the posts. Has MofA, in its many years of existence, EVER written anything positive about the US? Has Johnson? Read the comments. Are there any commenters that ever say anything positive about the US?

          These are US/West bashing forums – with plenty of support for socialism, Hamas, Russia, China, etc.

          It’s right there for all to see. Anti-US folks apparently are sensitive to be called out for what they are.

  5. d74 says:

    The US justice system has made Julian admit his guilt.
    He will be free at the price of a legal acrobatics that is not very elegant (for the US justice system). For either he is guilty and severely punished, his crime not insignificant, or he is innocent and his conviction is a legal forfeit.

    These details show that the US justice system is highly politicized.

    The main thing is that he’s free.

    The other concern is that the tentacles of US justice are spreading almost everywhere (Sweden, Britts, Australia). The regular administration of good justice is not the goal of the prosecution. This simple fact, perfectly illustrated by the lengthy Assange affair, is fraught with danger for freedoms.

  6. Landis says:

    Very very glad to see this news! I applaud his decision to admit his “guilt” and obtain his deserved freedom. However, as was said above, the idea that he was not a journalist, and thus entitled to all the protections of a journalist has always seemed ridiculous to me. (would be fascinated to hear broader takes from the committee on the pentagon papers but will leave that aside for now)

    This is now underscored by his requirement to admit his “guilt” and therefore maintain as precedent the illegality of what he did, which has historically been not illegal (report on information leaked from sources that is in the public interest and of importance, particularly when the information revealed shows corruption or impropriety). In a similar vein is the disclosure by Congressman Mike Turner of Russian intentions to add nuclear elements in space. Something that my understanding is no longer prohibited by what were long standing treaties.

    I tread carefully here as I am not an intelligence or military professional like many here are, but my initial inclination is that the danger of reporting on secrets only underscore how dangerous they are to begin with, which doesn’t lessen when they remain hidden. Would be extremely curious at any broader thoughts here, because it seems to me in both cases, what is being “leaked” is not trivial, but rather integral to our operation and understanding in and of the world.

    • TTG says:


      I think both the USG and Assange are both tired of all this and are aware there are shades of gray in both the USG case and Assange’s actions. The single charge is “Conspiracy to Obtain and Disclose National Defense Information,” pretty much a felony espionage charge. In this case he didn’t just publish leaked information. That would be journalism. He conspired with Manning to obtain that classified information. DOJ is seeking time served as a sentence for this single count, another indication they want this over.

      • Eric Newhill says:

        If Assange really did encourage and assist Manning in hacking into classified info, then screw him. He should be imprisoned. However, I never understood why there was no trial; why the evidence was heard. Keeping him lock-up in limbo is what I found to be wrong. So, why did the trial never materialize timely? Case actually not as strong as touted to be? I also the rape charges were complete BS.

        • TTG says:

          Eric Newhill,

          The USG tried for years to get him extradited to the US so he could stand trial. We also never heard about the US vs Wikileaks case involving Russia and the 2016 election. That one hasn’t disappeared even with this plea deal. I agree the rape charges were complete BS.

          • Eric Newhill says:

            Russia and the 2016 election is where we part ways. I’ve heard the arguments for both major camps. It looks to me like a download by someone inside the DNC (Seth Rich?).

          • TTG says:

            Eric Newhill,

            The DOJ laid out a lot of forensic evidence of the Russian hack of the DNC and how data was moved back to Russia in one of the indictments.

          • LeaNder says:

            The DOJ laid out a lot of forensic evidence of the Russian hack of the DNC

            relying on CrowdStrike et al?

            Assange, finally. Good news.

          • TTG says:


            See what I wrote to James.

          • James says:


            My understanding is that all that forensic evidence analyzed by the FBI was furnished to the FBI by a firm, named Crowdstrike, that worked for Hillary Clinton. The FBI never looked at the physical hard drives, they simply looked at images provided to them by this private firm.


            When you have the physical drives you can look at information that has been erased or changed. When you look at data files copied from those drives, you cannot.

          • TTG says:


            The FBI and probably the NSA got a lot more than what CrowdStrike got. You don’t need physical drives. It’s better to get the live traffic and what’s in volatile memory. The FBI/NSA caught the Russians in the act of issuing commands and transferring stolen information.

          • Eric Newhill says:

            “The DOJ says” isn’t exactly confidence inspiring in my view.

          • TTG says:

            Eric Newhill,

            They committed it to a sworn indictment. Not an absolute guarantee of truth, but better than conspiracy theories.

          • LeaNder says:

            You don’t need physical drives. It’s better to get the live traffic and what’s in volatile memory.
            I agree, TTG. Besides, it’s possible to do identical forensic clones or images, or bit stream images.

            But: I am not sure what you are referring to here. Indictment? Another specific document?
            The DOJ laid out a lot of forensic evidence

          • gordon reed says:

            Bill Binney has said that it was an inside job and when Shawn Henry was deposed by the Senate Intelligence committee he stated that he had no proof that the Russians were responsible only circumstantial evidence.

          • TTG says:

            gordon reed,

            Shawn Henry did the CrowdStrike cleanup of the DNC systems. They didn’t track anything outside the DNC systems. That wasn’t the scope of their contract. The FBI/NSA does the worldwide tracking of the hacks.

          • TonyL says:


            Yeah. I recall the leak/hack debate in this blog. Bill Binney was wrong he adopted the “Forensicator” analysis. That analysis had a lot of holes in it. We debunked some back then.

            Binney had retired for a while at that time. So his info about what’s going on inside NSA was not upto date.

            I thought it was a Russian hack job. The files timestamps were an obsfucation (an oldest trick to divert the forensic trail, i.e. to make it look like some insider’s leak).

            Glad to hear you confirmed “The FBI/NSA does the worldwide tracking of the hacks.”

  7. James says:

    If I might be allowed to go off topic – Tulsi Gabbard speaks the truth about Ukraine:

    I had really been hoping that Trump would pick Tulsi as his VP. Sigh.

  8. babelthuap says:

    Julian was always going to push it to this level. He is now a living legend. A hero. Basically the journalism medal of honor despite being surrounded by cowards and sycophants in his field to include Trump who would not pardon him and going after all who went after Julian.

  9. Condottiere says:

    He’s giving up safety for perceived freedom. Dead man walking.

  10. leith says:

    12 years is enough. But he’ll plead guilty now, and then as soon as he’s able he’ll say “no, I was never guilty, just doing ma job as a journo”, which he never was.

    And why do you all seem to think the Swedish sex abuse charges were BS. I’ll believe his victim more than I’d believe a scumbag like Assange. She got a bad rap:


    Yeah it was not rape as we know it in the states, more like sex abuse instead of forced rape. The Swedes do have some tough laws on that. But it boils down to the fact that he thought he was a sex god and thought No meant something else.

    • Eric Newhill says:

      According to her he was dud and not a stud. She didn’t want a second round and he did and wanted to ride bareback as well (which in Sweden is some kind of crime). Sounds like a bad time, IMO, not rape, especially when it’s her word against his, no supporting evidence. Anyhow, just answering your question.

  11. mcohen says:

    It is not whst jules baby released but what he kept us a back up.Obviously whatever it was got him released in time for the november election.The sword now officially hangs.like a chad.imho.

  12. Keith Harbaugh says:

    On the subject of the manifest political persecution of former President Trump
    by both several courts in Democrat-run states and the media,
    I think this is an excellent description of the situation:


    • TTG says:

      Keith Harbaugh,

      Georgia is a Republican-run state from Governor to AG, although the people of Georgia vote purple. Florida is Republican-run, although Cannon is federal so that’s immaterial.

      • Keith Harbaugh says:

        Yes, you are absolutely right.

        There were two legal issues I was trying to refer to.

        1. The subject of Jonathan Turley’s article.
        2. The actions against Trump by the New York legal system.

        I should have been clearer about that.

  13. Wunduk says:

    Islands were a compromise as Assange refused to travel to mainland US. See:
    Plea bargain reflects an implicit admission of the many mistakes in the IC on access provided to SPC Manning.
    I think it is time to move on. Hope he remembers what he did to the people whose names he leaked.

  14. Keith Harbaugh says:

    The plea agreement apparently imposed severe restrictions on what Assange can do in the future.


    From the CTH article:

    “Despite the public face of Assange’s lawyers and Wikileaks in general, the plea agreement severely puts limits on the ability of Wikileaks to continue their operations.

    It should be noted that part of the agreement outlines how Wikileaks will give the USA any/all unpublished information, or destroy all unpublished information that Wikileaks possesses that is not limited to USA interests, classified information or national security.

    In essence, any/all information in the care/custody of Wikileaks that has not been published is no longer available for Wikileaks to use.”

  15. Keith Harbaugh says:

    The NYT gives an extensive discussion of how this sets a new precedent for what can be prosecuted.


    “successfully indicting a nongovernment official for publishing national-security information of public interest that he had obtained while working with a source is different.
    No one had ever been charged under the Espionage Act for a journalistic act,
    in part because there had long been a widespread assumption that applying that law to such acts would be unconstitutional.

    The charge against Mr. Assange, then, crossed a line.
    It showed that the 21st-century crackdown on leakers could expand to encompass
    criminalizing the same sort of actions that brought to light important post-Sept. 11, 2001, abuses like warrantless wiretapping and torture, as well as day-to-day journalism about military, intelligence or diplomatic matters that help people better understand the world.”

  16. English Outsider says:

    Stuff’s getting leaked all the time.



    Make what you will of that – probably Kiryeyev had been told the Russians hadn’t intended to take Kiev anyway – that’s information in both the Ukrainian and US press both Washington and Kiev would rather not have had discussed or confirmed. No one prosecuted for releasing it.

    WAPO on US Intelligence work in Kiev since 2014 –

    ““The CIA has spent ‘tens of millions’ of dollars on transforming Kiev’s Soviet-style spy services into ‘potent allies against Moscow,’ The Washington Post reported on Monday, citing multiple sources in the US and Ukrainian intelligence communities:

    “These operations have been cast as extreme measures Ukraine was forced to adopt in response to Russia’s invasion last year. In reality, they represent capabilities that Ukraine’s spy agencies have developed over nearly a decade — since Russia first seized Ukrainian territory in 2014 — a period during which the services also forged deep new bonds with the CIA.

    ” The missions have involved elite teams of Ukrainian operatives drawn from directorates that were formed, trained and equipped in close partnership with the CIA, according to current and former Ukrainian and U.S. officials. Since 2015, the CIA has spent tens of millions of dollars to transform Ukraine’s Soviet-formed services into potent allies against Moscow, officials said.

    “The agency has provided Ukraine with advanced surveillance systems, trained recruits at sites in Ukraine as well as the United States, built new headquarters for departments in Ukraine’s military intelligence agency, and shared intelligence on a scale that would have been unimaginable before Russia illegally annexed Crimea and fomented a separatist war in eastern Ukraine. The CIA maintains a significant presence in Kyiv, officials said.” (washingtonpost.com 10/23/23)”

    “multiple sources in the US and Ukrainian intelligence communities”. None as far as I know prosecuted for releasing information that should have been kept secret.

    The NYT also going into some detail on Intelligence operations inside Ukraine.


    None prosecuted.

    Also in Syria. NYT on the bombing of the Tabqa dam.


    To write that article must have taken some conversations with officials who were leaking. “Conspiring” to leak too, so contravening the clause Assange finally pleaded guilty to. None prosecuted. Back then the Western press – even the UK press – was releasing a deal of information that could only have come from “sources”.

    These types of articles appear in the Western press all the time. I attribute the release of such information to faction fighting – Washington is riven with factions and they leak against each other when it suits them – but behind all such articles are officials releasing information they should not.

    Assange’s mistake seems to have been that he was getting and releasing information that suited none of the factions that had any clout. So he was hammered.

    On his confinement, a point few find disturbing is that his treatment in Belmarsh prison was disgraceful. Going after a dissident journalist is one thing. Subjecting Assange to conditions more spiteful and inhumane that anything Bukovsky was subjected to, when the Soviets went after him in his time, is quite another.

    The one bright spot in the whole affair was that, although there were plenty in England who took up the Assange case, as far as I could see the main impetus in Europe behind helping him came from Germany. I found that hopeful.

    • TTG says:


      Releasing information to the press is not leaking information to the press. That the CIA has been rebuilding Ukrainian intelligence services since 2014 has not been a secret. Nor are very close operating relationships with foreign intelligence services. That’s actually SOP for the CIA, and to a growing extent, the NSA and DIA. DoD has also been tight with the Ukrainian Armed Forces since about that time. It’s not a secret.

      The Tabqa dam bombing and the efforts to prevent an ensuing catastrophe was also know shortly after the events. I doubt those sources providing info to the NYT reporters were relaying classified information from CENTCOM or JSOC by the time they talked with the reporters.

      I do agree that Assange’s treatment at Belmarsh was unnecessarily harsh, as was Manning’s treatment at Quantico. Assange had good reason to avoid extradition to the US at all costs given his treatment at Belmarsh. But your attempted sugar coating of the Soviet prison system is obscene.

      • English Outsider says:

        TTG – that is not correct. I am not “sugar coating” some other system of justice. I am objecting to mine.

        “Obscene”? Then the Assange case is more so. I instanced Bukovsky because he knew the ropes and was thus able to avoid the worst they might have done to him. He knew his way around the law they were using to torment him and managed to emerge from the ordeal hale and hearty in the end. Assange, by the looks of him, hasn’t.

        There’s worse done in prison by the authorities than is acceptable. Tommy Robinson was deliberately shut up in a cell with several assailants and the guards kept him shut up in there until it was time for him to be taken to hospital. That was ugly. But for Assange to be treated as he was, in the full glare of publicity, UN observers reporting on his deteriorating condition and Assange still left to deteriorate further was, I reckon, uglier still.

        And what have we come to when it is possible even to compare prison treatment of a dissident in England with that of a major dissident of the Soviet period and come out worse from the comparison?

        And yes, one is aware that ugly things occur in all prisons, Russian, American, ours Of course they do and worse than happened in this case. But to prate of the “Rules based international order” when the authorities themselves – not some malicious prison guard or fellow prisoner but the authorities themselves! – mandate such treatment and doggedly persist with it in spite of international condemnation is truly “obscene”.

        • TTG says:


          You were fine in your criticism of the British treatment of Assange. I agree it was unnecessarily harsh, but you spoiled your criticism saying it was worse than the Soviet treatment of Bukovsky and so many others subjected to Soviet prisons, prison psychiatric hospitals and gulags. Bukovsky had 12 years of that. If you said it was akin to a Soviet prison, I could go along with you. His self-imposed imprisonment in the Ecuadorian Embassy was pretty brutal as well, at least psychologically.

          • English Outsider says:

            TTG – I instanced Bukovsky because he was good at arguing law and regulation.. Assange was too, in that he had very good lawyers. One survived OK, judging by Bukovsky’s vim and vigour when he finally got out. Assange didn’t.

            That I should have said. But is there disagreement here?

            I agree that it was akin to the Soviet treatment of dissidents, It’s that that’s unacceptable. We pride ourselves on having a good justice system in England. Or did.

            On a side note, many of the Soviet dissidents who got out, Bukovsky among them, were disturbed to find the West they’d escaped to bore similarities to what they’d escaped from. Solzhenitsyn stopped being well received in the West when he made that observation public. A rotten historian but he saw some things straight.

            It was Bukovsky, I believe, who coined “EUSSR” when he found so many features of political life in the EU alarmingly similar to those he was familiar with in the old Soviet Union.

            And when I look at the incessant lawfare Trump finds himself embroiled in, or what was done to General Flynn, I often think. of those who fall foul of the authorities, it might be less hassle to pop them straight in the gulag and save on the lawyer’s fees.

            Anyway, we agree Assange’s treatment was unsatisfactory. That is the main point. Did they twist his arm to make him sign away his right to compensation? I haven’t seen that mentioned yet.

          • LeaNder says:

            Funny that. I could have told you. But good that EO himself did. 😉

Comments are closed.