MyronGainesX - Why Julian Assange Was Freed

All Episodes

Previous Next

July 1, 2024 - MyronGainesX

02:00:55

Why Julian Assange Was Freed

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

Time	Text
	All right, we are live.
	What's up, guys?
	Welcome to FedReacts today.
	We're going to be talking about, we're going to be talking about Julian Assange.
	We've got a lot to get into, guys.
	Let's get into it.
	Our special agent with homeless investigations, okay, guys, HSI.
	This is what Fed Reacts covers.
	Defender Jeffrey Williams, an associate of YSL, did commit the felony.
	Here's what 6ix9ine actually got.
	I can share this curious.
	This attack shifted the whole U.S. government.
	This guy got arrested for espionage, okay?
	Trading secrets with the Russian John Wayne Gacy, aka the killer clown, okay?
	One of the most prolific serial killers of all time, killed 33 people.
	Zodiac Killer is a pseudonym of an unidentified serial killer who operated in Northern California.
	They really get off on getting attention from the media.
	Many years, Jeffrey Epstein sexually exploited and abused dozens of minor girls at his home.
	It was OJ working together to get Nicole killed.
	We're going to go over his past, the gang guys, so that it all makes sense.
	All right, we're back.
	What's up, guys?
	Welcome to FedReacts.
	I'm going to be talking about, let me raise my chair a little bit in my bed.
	Today we're going to be talking about Julian Assange.
	Guys, give me ones in the chat if you guys can hear me.
	Give me ones in the chat if you guys can hear me.
	Audio is good.
	We are live on all the platforms right now.
	We're live on YouTube, Rumble, Twitch, Twitter, Locals, aka Castle Club.
	So yeah.
	Sweet, sweet.
	Okay, good, good, good.
	You guys can hear me.
	Sweet.
	And we're live everywhere.
	So shout out to all my locals, people, everybody on X, everybody on Twitter, Castle Club as well.
	Guys, don't forget to join Castle Club, guys.
	That is where we do our stuff.
	You know, quick announcement rumble.com slash fresh fruit, as you guys know.
	That is the home base for us.
	Also, I'm live on Rumble, rumble.com slash FedReacts as well.
	That is where we have our Fed Reacts channel.
	So anytime we run into problems where we're not able to, you know, we get hit with a copyright or something like that.
	No worries.
	We're able to go ahead and go to Rumble.
	So anytime that happens with YouTube, we're able to have that backup and be able to stream over there without any issues, man.
	So that's, and or if it's, I'm, or if I'm showing things that are like, you know, gory, as you guys know, this is a true crime channel.
	A lot of times I have crime scene photos, which, you know, would probably get us in trouble on YouTube.
	So we also do that as well.
	And Castle Club is how you support, guys.
	You guys know this channel is demonetized.
	We've been demonetized on YouTube since it's been almost a year since August of last year.
	We've been demonetized, guys.
	So, you know, when you guys join Castle Club, it really does help.
	It helps us with being able to continue to run the podcast despite the fact that we are demonetized.
	And, you know, it helps me do Fed Reacts because I don't get paid to do this.
	This is basically me working for free at this point, but I do it because I think it's important.
	You guys love it.
	And yeah, I don't think there's anyone else on YouTube or any of the platforms really that's a former federal agent that actually used to do these types of cases.
	And luckily for you guys, I've done espionage cases before.
	So this is something that's kind of in my wheelhouse.
	So, you know, it'll definitely be interesting.
	And you know what?
	Here, I'll show y'all some receipts.
	Here's one of the espionage cases that I worked on because everyone talks all this shit like, oh, yo, you know, do you even blah, blah, blah.
	And it's like, nah, bro, I really was out here.
	So I think let me see here.
	Spy, Iran.
	Let's see here.
	Boom.
	Okay, here we go.
	This is the case that I worked on.
	Let me go ahead and enlarge this.
	Let me screen share with you, Ninjas.
	Okay, just to give you guys a little bit of my background, right, why I'm qualified to talk about this, because like a lot of other YouTubers can't do this.
	This was a case that I worked on, guys, right here.
	Muzaffar Kazi.
	This is a public case, so it's out there now.
	But this is actually one of the first cases I worked on, actually.
	But yeah, this is one of the espionage cases I worked way back in the day.
	I remember we got the information back in 2013-ish.
	The guy was basically shipping flight schematics over to Iran.
	So, yeah, he ended up pleading sentence over eight years in prison for attempting to send U.S. military technology to Iran.
	So, this was a case that I did.
	Let me see if I could find a criminal complaint on this thing.
	Nope.
	Let's see.
	Let's see.
	See, FBI did a press release, but this was the HSI case.
	HSI case, it was an HSI-led case, but FBI was involved.
	And so was who else was involved, man?
	Fuck.
	It was.
	Boom.
	So it was ICE HSI, USCON's Border Protection, U.S. Air Force.
	Yep, OSI.
	Yep.
	I remember them.
	FBI New Jersey.
	And then DCIS.
	There we go.
	Yeah.
	Defense Criminal Investigation Investigative Services.
	But yeah, this is a good case.
	This is one that I worked on.
	So yeah, guys, I've done these types of cases before, and I got receipts for y'all ninjas, okay?
	So I was really out here.
	Let me see if I can find a criminal complaint on this thing.
	And then we're going to get into the guy.
	Was the best looking dude?
	Pause.
	Is this it maybe?
	Oh, here we go.
	Yep, this is it.
	So they originally charged him with this guy.
	So when you do a criminal complaint, a lot of the times, you just want to get a charge on the individual right away, right?
	Just to get them in jail.
	And they hit him with a very, this is an easy charge to prove.
	You know, 18 USC 2314, right?
	So interstate transportation has stolen property of the value of 5,000 or more.
	And that was just to get him, you know, arrested because they didn't know what this guy was involved in and what he was stealing.
	So they just wanted to get him arrested right away.
	This was HSI out of Los Angeles.
	And then the case ended up getting transferred over to Connecticut.
	So, so yeah, this is, yeah, it was a CPI group.
	Okay, so anyway, you guys get the idea, right?
	But this is the case that I worked on that we did back in the day.
	All right.
	So besides me talking about that, let's get into today's topic at hand.
	Today, guys, we're going to be talking about Julian Assange, okay?
	So here he is right here, Australia National.
	All right.
	Julian Paul Assange, born July 3rd, 1971, is an Australian editor.
	His birthday's right around the corner, actually.
	Australian editor, publisher, and activist who founded WikiLeaks in 2006.
	He came to international attention in 2010 after Wikileaks published a series of leaks from Chelsea Manning, a former United States Army intelligence analyst, footage of a U.S. airstrike and Baghdad, U.S. military logs from the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, and U.S. diplomatic cables.
	Assange has won multiple awards for publishing and journalism.
	Okay.
	Now you guys are probably wondering who the fuck is Chelsea Manning?
	This is Chelsea Manning, guys, right here.
	Here we go.
	It was originally Bradley Manning, by the way, but he transitioned.
	Okay, so we'll just leave it there.
	We're on YouTube.
	So Chelsea Elizabeth Manning, born Bradley Edward Manning, December 17, 1987, is an American activist and whistleblower.
	She's a former United States Army soldier who was convicted by court-martial in July 2013 of violation of the Espionage Act and other offenses after disclosing to WikiLeaks nearly 750,000 classified or unclassified, but sensitive military and diplomatic documents.
	She was in prison from 2010 until 2017 when her sentence was commuted by President Barack Obama.
	A trans woman, Manning, said in 2013 that she had a female gender identity since childhood and wanted to be known as Chelsea Manning.
	Now, WikiLeaks, guys, right here, is a non-profit media organization, a publisher of leaked documents.
	It is funded by Node Nations and media partnerships.
	It has published classified documents and other media provided by anonymous sources.
	It was founded in 2006 by Julian Assange, an Australian editor, publisher, and activist.
	Since September 2018, Kristen Rafson, I probably butchered that, I apologize, has served as its editor-in-chief.
	Its website state that has released more than 10 million documents in associated analysis.
	WikiLeaks' most recent publication of original documents was in 2019.
	Its most recent publication was in 2021.
	From November 2022, on numerous documents on the organization's website became inaccessible in 2023.
	Assange said that Wikileaks is no longer able to publish due to his imprisonment and the effect that the U.S. government surveillance and WikiLeaks funding restrictions were having on potential whistleblowers.
	Okay, so that's a crash course on the main players: Julian Assange, okay, Wikileaks, and of course, Chelsea Manning.
	Okay, and this is the trifecta, guys, that led to Julian Assange getting arrested, right?
	So we have a documentary that we're going to play here, right?
	I'm going to speed it up a bit so you guys kind of get a background.
	Then we're going to go into what's currently going on with him.
	As you guys know, he pled guilty to one count, and we're going to go over that here in a bit.
	But I want you guys to kind of get a gist of how we got here.
	Okay.
	So I got this documentary that we're going to play.
	Hopefully, YouTube doesn't hit us with the copyright, but we'll see what happens.
	We're going to play this here at 1.25 speed.
	And this is called Julian Assange: The Price of Truth.
	And this is him being escorted out of the Ecuadorian embassy in 2019 or 2018-ish.
	See, he has the full-grown beard and everything.
	And look, it's like six of them escorting him out.
	That was British police coming into the embassy and arrested Julian.
	This is one example of many bigger.
	That's his dad.
	You guys can see they look strikingly similar.
	The persecution, deliberate torture, joy.
	I mean, I felt there was danger.
	I'm all right.
	There's people protesting on his behalf.
	I'm here with you with a concern for us, Julian's family and friends.
	is that Joanne's not here with us.
	Many, many millions of people have benefited immensely from the publication.
	I don't think Assange is.
	Let me look here.
	Let me double-check.
	Someone put a bell in the chat.
	Let me look here.
	Early life.
	He was born Julian Paul Hawkins on July 3rd, Townsville, Queensland, to Christine Ann Hawkins, a visual artist, and John Shipton, an anti-war activist and builder.
	The couple separated before their son was born when Julian was a year old.
	His mother married Brett Assange, an actor with whom she ran a small theater company and whom Assange regards as his father, choosing Assange's surname.
	Christine and Brett Assange divorced around 1979.
	Christine then became involved with Leif Maynell, also known as Leif Hamilton, whom Julian Assange later describes as a member of the Australian Cult called The Family.
	Menela Christ.
	Okay.
	Nah, man.
	I don't think so, guys.
	I don't think so.
	I do not think so, my friends.
	So, anyway, let's get back to it.
	We got some quick chats here.
	Myron Jr. is back.
	Yo, Myron, I was always curious if your parents were mad when you quit your federal job.
	Did your dad agree?
	Yeah, they didn't like it when I quit, guys.
	I'll be honest with y'all.
	They were like, hey, what are you doing?
	You know, because obviously your parents always err on the side of safety and security.
	So they weren't sure if the whole internet thing was going to work out, but it did.
	But that's your parents' job is to be skeptical of things like that.
	He don't love you.
	Says, I'm surprised you haven't done Oklahoma bombing.
	Those guys were on Al-Akbar time.
	I will do Timothy.
	I'll do Timothy McVeigh soon, guys.
	You guys have asked for that one, so don't worry.
	It's coming soon.
	One example is the collateral murder.
	Okay, this video that you guys are about to see is the famous video, okay, that really put the U.S. government out there.
	It put the U.S. military, put the intelligence agencies, it put them out there.
	All right, guys, so viewer disgrace is advised.
	Pirates and the gunner murder these people.
	And yet, Julian has to be extradited for reporting a war crime.
	Free!
	If Assange is extradited from the United States, then it will weigh a weight.
	Guys, give me one if the volume is good.
	It should be good.
	I got it turned up really high.
	But let me know.
	Audio should be good for the video.
	I'll drop the Rumble link in the chat for you guys in case something happens.
	I have a feeling that we might get hit with something.
	Oh, do me a favor.
	If you guys are watching this on Rumble, do me a solid.
	Can you guys open up a tab on YouTube?
	Let's get this thing up in the algorithm.
	As you guys know, I split the audience.
	I do this on Rumble, X, all the platforms.
	So, obviously, I don't have the most viewers on YouTube right now, right?
	Because we're obviously diversified over here.
	So, do me a favor, guys.
	Open it up on YouTube.
	The audio might be better for you guys on YouTube.
	Open it up on YouTube if you're watching on Rumble, almost a thousand you guys watching on Rumble.
	Open it up on YouTube, like the video.
	Let's get this thing up in Yalgo and support the channel, please, guys, because YouTube is how we reach new people, and then Rumble is where we keep the people.
	You know what I'm saying?
	It's a vindictive persecution, which is an attack on press freedom worldwide, and it should be fought by all means.
	And that's why this case got so important, it got so much attention, guys, is because, quite frankly, the U.S. government was trying to criminalize journalism.
	We're going to talk about that here in a little bit as well.
	I'm going to play this a little bit of a faster speed.
	Yes, Angie is here, guys.
	You can see she's just helping out with some things behind the scenes.
	The story of WikiLeaks begins in her and my dad are watching a soccer game.
	Middle of the war in Iraq, a handful of hackers and a few journalists.
	They quickly made the U.S. military's worst nightmare a reality by revealing a classified video to the world.
	Let me know if 1.25 is too much for you guys.
	I got to the 1.5 speed right now.
	If I need to bring it down to 1.25, let me know.
	When I first saw it, actually, it didn't have that much impact.
	Because I didn't know where it was, when it was.
	What was the circumstances?
	Who were these people?
	It was only by following the path through the thing and seeing how relaxed and sort of innocent most of the people were in the video that the carnage then became so outrageous.
	The video is complex.
	To better decipher it, the founder of WikiLeaks and his team moved to Rikovik, the capital of Iceland.
	They rent a discreet house they call The Bunker.
	It's July 2007.
	An Apache helicopter flies over a neighborhood in Baghdad.
	The onboard camera spots a group of Iraqis on the ground.
	Two of them are carrying weapons.
	The pilot's in radio contact with his base.
	Or so they thought they were carrying weapons.
	Request permission to fire.
	1.5 is good.
	Okay, thank you guys.
	I appreciate it.
	Because this is a longer documentary.
	We're not going to watch the whole thing, guys.
	But I think this is very good, so you guys kind of understand.
	But this is one of the big videos that he leaked.
	They got the United States pissed.
	Once I started discovering more and more detail, this is when it became more emotional.
	So to understand, yes, this person was a journalist who lawyers, and this was a driver from Rails.
	Among the victims, WikiLeaks identifies Saeed Shama, a Reuters assistant driver and photographer, Namir Noor Eldin.
	And the helicopter pilot obviously sees Namir inside us as an insurgent and instantly decides that the cameras are not weapons.
	RPG.
	RPG.
	Firing.
	This is what that sentence, basically, for those guys.
	I'm all up.
	Come on, fire.
	I write it.
	Now, the full video, guys, you can find online, but it's pretty graphic.
	They're just, like, drilling these dudes.
	A few minutes later, the nature of the incident changes.
	The mission becomes a war crime.
	A black van approaches to assist the wounded.
	Inside, there are no combatants, just two men with two children.
	The pilot makes up an imminent threat and requests permission to fire again.
	And then they start shooting a car that came to help out, man.
	Crazy.
	Valexi VR says, Would it be easier if you had someone to take screenshots of Rance and CC in chats in a place so they will be able to read without the regular chats in between?
	I do the show by myself on this one, guys, so it's a little bit tough.
	Jakross goes, Fed, can we get a topic by topic breakdown of the debate at some point?
	Yeah, we can.
	You guys should watch the episode.
	I broke down the debate pretty well.
	I mean, if you really want me to get in the weeds, we can, but...
	On the ground, corpses everywhere.
	The helicopter then captures on film the arrival of a group of soldiers, among them Ethan McCord.
	But this is me here.
	I was one of about six who were dismounted at the time, running up onto the scene.
	I had never seen anything like that before.
	I saw on the corner what appeared to have been three men.
	This is one of the soldiers that was there on the scene.
	And they were completely destroyed by the 30 millimeter rounds.
	It almost to me didn't seem real.
	It kind of seemed like something that you would see out of a bad horror movie.
	The soldier realizes the severity of the incident as he approaches the van.
	He locates two wounded people: a four-year-old girl and a 10-year-old boy.
	I originally thought that the boy was deceased because he had a wound to the right side of his head and he wasn't moving.
	And when I went back out to the van, he made like a labored breath movement.
	And that's when I started screaming that the boy's alive, the boy's alive.
	And I grabbed him.
	Thank God the kid was alive, man.
	running into the Bradley, which is now.
	At this point, he looks up at me, and I look down at him, and I told him it's gonna be okay.
	I have you, don't worry.
	It's going to be okay.
	And his eyes rolled back into his head.
	And at that point, I thought that he possibly had just died in my arms.
	After this day, I couldn't justify what I was doing in Iraq anymore.
	Yeah, guys, the Iraq war was a monumental L. You know, you guys have seen me talk about this a million times, whether you guys watch me on Twitter or you guys watch me on Rumble.
	I don't talk about this as much on YouTube for obvious reasons, but basically, you guys know why we invaded Iraq.
	Okay, you guys know why we invaded Iraq.
	And it definitely didn't serve U.S. interests for us to be over there.
	It made zero sense.
	The whole war was pushed by a bunch of neocons, you know, Bill Crystal, Wolfowitz, Pearl.
	Okay.
	You guys know where I'm going here.
	So we had no business to be in Iraq, and a lot of innocent people died us being over there.
	And this really exposed that, you know, when people were starting to kind of wake up at this point when this guy leaked, that we shouldn't have been there in the first place.
	So it just exacerbated the situation.
	So yeah, let's get back to it.
	I became very angry with the war, the death and destruction of innocent people.
	That's not what I joined the military for.
	On April the 5th, 2010, WikiLeaks publishes the video online.
	The public discovers the true horror of this war.
	In Baghdad, the families of the victims learn of what happened.
	The man driving the van died, but the boy, saved by Ethan McCord, survived.
	That's the kid right there.
	He's alive.
	He survived.
	I'm Dylan Radigan.
	A shocking graphic video from Iraq, apparently showing U.S. troops gunning down innocent civilians.
	And what made it worse is that, you know, they thought they were combatants, but they weren't.
	They had camera equipment.
	They were fucking, you know, journalists from routers.
	You know, so this was a huge L for the United States.
	Huge L. And for it to be exposed for the public, because guys, remember, the Iraq war was not internationally favored, right?
	Like when we first went in there, everyone was like, yeah, woo, against terrorism.
	And then as we started to kind of not find these weapons of mass destruction, people started asking questions.
	Why are we there?
	Does Salama have anything to do with 9-11?
	Is this really a war on terror?
	What the fuck is going on?
	So this footage coming out made it even worse.
	Okay, Doge poster says, I think the police deal with Assange was completely political.
	They wanted to win over the more dissident left, Bernie Bros to Biden.
	That's why I think they waited until now to do this.
	I will give you my take on why I think they let Bernie Bernie.
	Why they let Assange go as well.
	Don't worry, I'm going to give you guys.
	I got like a full breakdown of why I think it happened.
	It just got done dropping my kids off at school back in April 2010.
	I went home, grabbed a cup of coffee, sat down on the couch, and turned on the news.
	And there I was running across the screen at my own television carrying a child.
	I knew immediately what it was.
	And it actually felt like a huge slap in the face.
	I had spent so much time trying to forget that incident.
	And then here it was being pushed in my face again.
	Ethan McCord was demobilized in 2010.
	Since then, he has been an anti-war activist.
	The collateral murder release was very important.
	The video is iconic, it's symbolic.
	It was a stunning testimony of a war crime.
	There was no question about it.
	YouTube stream is down.
	Okay.
	Yep, I knew that was possible.
	It was going to happen.
	We'll just wait for this to come back real quick.
	And don't worry, guys.
	On the replay, it'll be back.
	But honestly, this honestly, guys, that really was the main thing that got the United States was super interested, right?
	So yeah.
	Yeah, no, I know I know YouTube is down.
	The other thing I want to say is that And we'll talk about Chelsea Manning here in a second.
	But what we'll do is we're going to go back to old FedReacts type stuff, okay?
	And what I mean by that is we're going to go ahead and we're going to go through some of the documents of this case.
	And don't worry, guys.
	I think that covers mostly the main stuff.
	The stream went down, I think, when just now.
	But we'll stay on YouTube.
	We'll stay up on YouTube for a bit longer.
	Don't worry about it.
	Because I got some documents that we're going to share anyway.
	So we'll be back here on YouTube here in a second.
	So while we wait for YouTube to come back.
	And all my ninjas, guys, open up two tabs.
	Okay, do me a solid.
	Open up two tabs.
	Open up a YouTube tab and open up a Rumble tab.
	Okay.
	If you're watching on Rumble, open up a YouTube tab for me.
	Because that'll help with live viewers if you got on YouTube.
	And yeah, sucks, guys.
	It is what it is.
	So now don't worry, guys.
	We're not suspended.
	The stream's going to come back.
	It always does this.
	When you're a pro like me and you react to stuff, you just know that YouTube is going to take the stream down for a little bit and then it's going to come back.
	So, and the interesting part is on the replay, this stream is unavailable thing.
	It's going to be gone.
	Interestingly enough.
	So the stream will be back.
	Don't worry.
	While we do that, I'll read some of these chats.
	Julian Assange was the reason Hillary Clinton lost in the 2016 election primarily due to exposing Hillary's deleted emails.
	Yes, that was a big part of it, my friend.
	I love FedReacts.
	Let's go, baby.
	Myron always bring in the heat on Sunday night.
	Great IRL stream Friday, by the way, too.
	Thank you.
	Which, by the way, it seems like you guys want us to do more of those, which we will do.
	Don't worry.
	We're going to be doing those streams, IRL streams.
	I'm thinking like every other Friday we'll be doing that.
	So every other Friday, we'll probably go ahead and do it.
	See, we're back on YouTube now.
	See, guys, I told y'all.
	We just give it a minute or two and we're back.
	So I will be doing more of those IRL streams probably every Friday.
	But we got some things that we got planned for you guys on FDRs to spice it up for you guys.
	J-Rock says, just subscribed today on Castle Club.
	Hold on.
	My man, I appreciate FNF for all the free game.
	Y'all give me a quick question.
	Do you think them boys rewrote the Christian Bible?
	I don't know, bro.
	That's a good question.
	But I don't know.
	Let's see here if I missed anything else.
	Have you thought about doing an episode on Ruby Ridge, the predecessor to Waco?
	We will do it eventually.
	Don't worry.
	J-Rock, thank you so much.
	And guys, again, if you guys rock with Fresh and Fit, man, join CastleClub.tv, guys.
	That is where we post all of our content.
	We got playlists in there that has everything organized.
	So yeah.
	So, okay.
	We're going to go through Julian Assange's case, guys, okay?
	We're on Pacer, okay?
	As you guys know, PACER is where you can find all the federal criminal cases.
	I got to enlarge this for y'all so you can actually read it because it's this weird, you know, yellow government website.
	I'm going to get my face out the camera for y'all real quick so you guys can actually see what the hell I'm going through here.
	Okay.
	Give me one sec.
	Okay, I'm ugly mugs out the way.
	All right, cool.
	So you can see here, Julian Paul Assange, right?
	He was represented by Barry Joel Pollock.
	Okay.
	And then here are the accounts that he originally got, right?
	Conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, receive national defense information, obtain and disclose national defense information, obtaining national defense information, conspiracy to commit computer intrusions, like more accounts, right?
	Like just, and he ended up getting a bunch of them dismissed, right?
	On June 26th, 2024, which is a part of, obviously, you know, the plea deal that he got, right?
	And so we're going to go through the case systematically.
	So on December 21st, 2017, there was a sealed complaint right here, okay?
	And as you guys know, what a complaint is, it's a criminal complaint.
	This was filed in the Eastern District of Virginia.
	And they charged him, as I told you guys before, it's easier a lot of the times to charge a simple charge just to get the, just to get it filed, right?
	So on or about the dates of March 2010 in the county of Loudon, first brought in the Eastern District of Virginia, the defendant violated, boom, 18 USC 371.
	This is the general conspiracy charge, guys, right?
	Conspiracy to access a computer without authorization exceeding authorized access to obtain classified national defense information in violation of 8 USC 1030A1, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, right?
	And then you got special agent Megan Brown is the affian on this thing, okay?
	And we also got the criminal complaint, my friends.
	Here it is, okay?
	So I was able to dig this thing up because before when I looked up this case, you couldn't find this thing.
	All right.
	So here it is, December 21st, 2017, as you guys see, with the case number MJ, boom.
	So we're going to go ahead.
	I, Megan Brown, make this affidavit in support of a criminal complaint charging defendant Julian P. Assange of violating 18 USC 371, right?
	And then we go into paragraph two.
	This is what I tell you guys all the time.
	This is what I call the I Love Me paragraph, right?
	She tells you guys who she is.
	She specializes with FBI, okay?
	FBI guys typically takes the lead on espionage cases, but there are some situations where other agencies like HSI, OSI, or any of these other agencies can do it.
	So for example, Manning, right?
	Since she was Army, they charged her in the military.
	Okay, we're going to talk about her military case here in a little bit, but it was Army CID that arrested her, okay?
	Matter of fact, let me see if I can grab the video here.
	She was arrested.
	I think I have it here somewhere for you ninjas.
	Nope.
	Okay, was it here maybe?
	Okay.
	Anyway, we'll go back to the document.
	Now, we're not going to read this entire complaint, guys, because it's like 20, 30 pages, but we'll go through it, okay?
	All right.
	So she talks about her background, et cetera.
	We're not going to read all that.
	You know, she basically, this paragraph, guys, the second paragraph, anytime you read a criminal complaint, guys, the second paragraph is typically going to talk about their experience, what they've done, why they're qualified to write this affidavit, et cetera, okay?
	And then, boom, as usual, you guys have read many criminal complaints with me.
	This is based on my personal observations, and this is just to establish probable cause.
	So what we're going to read in this criminal complaint, guys, aren't all the facts of the investigation.
	It's just what they need for probable cause, right?
	Which is the standard of the United States to affect an arrest.
	Also, guys, do me a favor.
	Again, 2,000 yellow ninjas over on Rumble.
	Come on over, open up a tab on YouTube.
	Let's keep the YouTube views up so that we can reach more people.
	Okay?
	So let's get into the probable cause, all right?
	So these charges relate to one of the largest compromises of classified information in the history of the United States.
	This is true, right?
	Between in or around January 2010 and May 2010, Chelsea Manning, an intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, downloaded four nearly complete and largely classified databases with approximately 90,000 Afghanistan war-related significant activity reports, 400,000 Iraq war-related significant activity reports, 800 Guantanamo Bay detainee assessments, and 250,000 U.S. State Department cables.
	Manning provided these records to Wikileaks, a website founded and led by the defendant Julian P. Assange.
	On its website, WikiLeaks solicited, expressly solicited classified information for public dissemination.
	Wikileaks publicly released the vast majority of the classified records on its website in 2010 and 2011.
	Manning has since been tried and convicted by court-martial for her illegal acts in transmitting the official information to Wikileaks.
	And I know what you guys are saying.
	Well, Myron, hold on one second.
	Why isn't Chelsea Manning in this case as well?
	Why wasn't she charged?
	Well, guys, the reason why she wasn't charged is because she was charged by the court martials, okay?
	And we'll go into it real quick right here.
	Okay.
	United States v.
	Manning.
	And there's no public records on this because this is a military case, my friends.
	Okay.
	So this was a court martial of a former United States Army private first class Chelsea Manning.
	So she served in Iraq since October 2009.
	Manning was arrested in May 2010 after Adrian Lamo, a computer hacker in the United States, indirectly informed the Army CID that Manning had acknowledged passing classified material to WikiLeaks.
	Manning was ultimately charged with 22 specified offenses, including communicating national defense information to an unauthorized source and most serious of the charges, aiding the enemy.
	Other charges included violation of the Espionage Act of 1917, stealing U.S. government property, and charges under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 and charges related to the failure to obey lawful general orders under Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.
	Manning answered guilty pleased to 10 of the 22 specified offenses of February 2013.
	Now you guys are wondering, well, Myron, what do you mean by this?
	Like, why wasn't she charged by the FBI like Assange?
	Well, she was charged by Army CID, guys.
	And Army CID, they have their own special agents.
	They're their own law enforcement agency.
	And they typically enforce the law on military personnel.
	Okay.
	And Army CID can present cases to the United States Attorney's Office, right, for regular prosecution, like a civilian of a Julian Assange, or they could present cases to what you see here with the court martial where you can prosecute someone through the military.
	Now, what I suspect the reason why they went and took this in the military angle is because, number one, she was active duty, I think, at the time.
	And then, number two, the other reason, guys, is because the court martials don't lose.
	Anyone that's in the military, you guys already know what it is.
	You go to a court martial, you're going to probably take an L. Okay.
	They got a very high conviction rate.
	Okay.
	And you don't have the same level of protection as you would a citizen, right?
	You have to comply a lot more when you're in the military and you get arrested on some stuff.
	So it's a stronger case on their end, right?
	So luckily for her, she didn't get the aiding the enemy one.
	Okay.
	So the trial, the trial of the 12 remaining charges began on June 13th, 2013, and went on to judge, went to the judge on July 26, 2013.
	The findings were rendered on July 30th.
	Manning was acquitted of the most serious charge for giving secrets to WikiLeaks in addition to five or six espionage counts.
	And then on 20, and she's free now, guys.
	She was sentenced to 35 years in prison, reduction of pay grade and pay grade to E1, forfeiture of all pay allowances, and a dishonorable discharge, which is terrible.
	Okay.
	Dishonorable discharge, guys, I would argue, is worse than a felony conviction, I would say.
	Okay.
	On January 17, 2017, President Barack Obama commuted Manning's sentence to a total of seven years confinement.
	Manning was released on May 17, 2017.
	On May 31st, 2018, the U.S. Army Court of Criminal Appeals upheld Manning's conviction violating the Espionage Act of 1917.
	So obviously, right, Obama probably under some pressure said, hey, look, she's a whistleblower.
	She did the right thing.
	She went ahead and provided this information.
	So here's the thing, man.
	I think Assange is fine because he's a journalist.
	Her, though, I don't know.
	It's questionable because the information that she leaked, guys, put a lot of classified information out there and compromised some military operations, right?
	And as someone who has a clearance, you take an oath, you're held to a higher standard than a citizen.
	A journalist, they're protected.
	As a military personnel, you don't have the same level of protection.
	I think that's a big reason why I don't foresee them pardoning Edward Snowden, who's also in a very similar boat.
	We broke down the Edward Snowden case as well, guys, for some of you guys that are wondering.
	But when you're a government official, guys, and you have a clearance, you're just held to a higher standard, unfortunately, right?
	And they can really fuck you over.
	So with Manning, right, she did get a break by Obama commuting her sentence, but I don't think she'll ever get the appeal.
	And she's probably going to stay with that dishonorable discharge.
	Okay.
	So yeah.
	Obama loves transgenders.
	Just ask his husband Michael.
	LOL.
	Low IQ combos.
	I can't read that comment on YouTube.
	So I'm using Jonathan Pollard and Neil Frank.
	I'll do them soon.
	Martin A.K.A. The man, a.k.a.
	the master topstick user.
	Don't forget about the Council Club super chats, please.
	You broke Smelly Vaginas.
	Join Council Club.
	Yeah, guys, join Castle Club.
	Surprise.
	Support the news, man.
	Oh, yeah, we got some classical chats.
	It goes, W Myron, W. Angie, and this is from JJ Itchiban.
	Keeping me entertained on the job.
	Shout out to all the CC generals, Jocasta and the big G DL Saint.
	Yep.
	Myron, the chief here, random asked question.
	Ever heard of the song that came out in the late 90s called Smack My Bitch Up by the Prodigy Song, Go Hard When You Pump It In Iron?
	I never heard it.
	It's her job to break you all, break up with you when she gets, when she bets against your future success.
	It's your job to make her regret that for the rest of her life.
	Wyron Gaines.
	Thank you so much, Beans Burner.
	Thank you.
	That's actually, yeah, that's one of my good quotes right there, my friend.
	So, all right, let's go back to the document, right?
	So now you guys know that she was charged by the military.
	All right.
	And I'll keep my ugly mug here while we break down this document.
	All right.
	The charges of this criminal complaint focus on specific illegal agreement that Assange and Manning reached in furtherance of Manning's illegal disclosure of fortified information.
	Sorry, of classified information.
	As explained below, investigators have recovered internet chats between Assange and Manning for March 2010.
	The chats reflect that on March 8th, 2010, Assange agreed to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on United States Department of Defense computers, DOD, connected to the classified secret internet protocol router network, CIPRANET, which, by the way, guys, Assange is a talented hacker.
	Okay, he is a talented hacker himself.
	Manning, who had access to computers in connection with her duties as an intelligence analyst, was using the computers to download classified records to transmit to WikiLeaks.
	Cracking the password would have allowed Manning to log into the computers under a username that did not belong to her.
	Such a deceptive measure would have made it more difficult for investigators to determine the source of the legal disclosures.
	While it remains unknown whether Manning and Assange were successful in cracking the password, a follow-up message from Assange to Manning on March 2010, March 10, 2010, reflects that Assange was actively trying to correct the password pursuant to their agreement.
	Okay.
	So, okay.
	Let's go ahead and get into the backgrounds, right?
	Defendant Julian P. Assange and WikiLeaks.
	All right.
	Assange, a citizen of Australia, created the website WikiLeaks in 2006 to release on the internet otherwise unavailable documents.
	WikiLeaks website solicited submissions of classified, censored, or otherwise restricted information.
	Although associates and volunteers work for WikiLeaks in various capacities, WikiLeaks was closely identified with Assange himself.
	As reported in an article published in Wired magazine in or around September 2010, Assange stated, I am the heart and soul of this organization, its founder, philosopher, spokesperson, original coder, organizer, financer, and all the rest.
	Okay, well, that was kind of snuff-snitching.
	Stupid.
	As stated by Assange in January 2010, interview during the 26th Chaos Communication Congress, WikiLeaks had a full-time staff of five and 800 occasional helpers.
	Assange has also stated that he made the final decision as to whether a particular document submitted to WikiLeaks was legitimate.
	And that right there, my friends, stupid is how they were able to pin it on him.
	Because they're like, look, you're the boss, right?
	Now they're going to get into co-conspirator.
	And then obviously, this is, they need to put this in here just because he never possessed a clearance, security clearance or need to know is prohibited from receiving classified information of the United States.
	They have to put that in there because anytime you deal with classified information, you need to have the proper clearance and you need to have a need to know, according to the U.S. government.
	All right.
	Co-conspirator Chelsea Manning, United States citizen, enlisted in the U.S. Army in October 2007.
	Subsequently attended the U.S. Army Intelligence Analyst course at Fort Hachua, Arizona.
	On April 7, 2008, Manning signed a classified information non-disclosure agreement.
	Right here, this is where they fucked her.
	Okay, that's where they pretty much in doing so.
	Manager Manning acknowledged being advised that unauthorized disclosure or retention or negligent handling of classified information could cause damage or irreparable injuries to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation.
	Okay.
	And then she got, oh shit, she had a top secret SCI clearance.
	Okay.
	She got that in 2009.
	In doing so, Manning acknowledged that she would be granted access to SCI material which involves or derives from intelligence sources or methods that are classified or in the process of being classified.
	Okay, so guys, SCI is one of the highest clearances you can get in the U.S. government.
	When I was on a job, I had a top secret.
	I didn't have a top secret SCI.
	I had a top secret.
	And SCI is a level above that.
	It stands for Secret Compartmentalized Information.
	Okay.
	So this kind of goes into the different clearances, right?
	So we'll move.
	So she had access to classified information networks in Iraq.
	We'll move forward from there.
	Right.
	Okay.
	So let's get into some of the facts of the case, right?
	According to Manning, she began helping WikiLeaks soon after WikiLeaks publicly released messages from the September 11, 2011 attacks on November 25, 2009.
	As examples in the following two sections demonstrate, Manning's transmitted a large amount of classified information to WikiLeaks prior to March 2010, which was when she formed the agreement with Assange that is the subject of this complaint.
	All right.
	So classified significant activity reports related to Iraq and Afghanistan war.
	So we're going to get into the first thing, the first stuff that she started going into.
	So we know who Assange is, we know who she is.
	We know what type of clearance that she had, and we know when she started working with him, right?
	During her court-martial proceedings, Manning has admitted that prior to March 2010, she provided WikiLeaks with classified significant activity reports from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Iraq wars, and Afghanistan war reports, respectively.
	According to Manning, she downloaded the Iraq war reports and Afghanistan war reports from the relevant CDINE databases in late December 2009 and early January 2010 and initially saved the records on a CD-RW that she kept in her SCIF.
	Okay.
	So she basically had a CD that she downloaded all the stuff on.
	This is 2007, guys.
	Okay.
	2010-ish.
	You know, burning CDs was a thing.
	I know you fucking Gen Zers are looking at me like, what the hell?
	Who burned CDs anymore?
	Yes.
	Yes, it was on its way out at that point, but people were still using CD-ROMs at that point.
	Okay.
	And a SCIF room, right, guys, SCIF.
	It's basically a room where you deal with classified information, right?
	A sensitive compartmented information facility, SCIF, United States military, national security, national defense, and intelligence parlance is an enclosed area within a building that is used to process sensitive compartmented information, types of classified information, right?
	So I've been in the SCIF before.
	You can't bring your phone in there.
	All the computers are, you know, deal with classified information, etc.
	You know, you can't go in there and record anything.
	So, yeah.
	So she was burning this stuff in the SCIF room on a CD, right?
	Which you can't do.
	Manning admitted that she took the CDs out of the SCIF and copied the data from the CDs onto her personal laptop.
	That is a L, my friend.
	Manning stated that she transferred the data from her laptop to a secure digital memory card, which she took with her SD card when she went on to leave later on.
	Well, she went on leave later in January 2010.
	So she took some vacation time, right?
	Investigators later recovered the SD card that Manning used to transport the Iraq wars and Afghanistan war reports.
	Forensic analysis of the SD card revealed that it contained the CIDNE databases for Iraq, 391,000 records, and Afghanistan, 91,000 records plus.
	The SD card also contained the README text file, which contained the following message.
	Which, okay.
	Iraq and Afghanistan significant activities between 0001, blah, blah, blah.
	Department of Defense combined information at data exchange.
	They're already sanitized.
	If any source identifying information, you might need to sit on this information perhaps 98, 180 days to figure out how to best release such a large amount of data and to protect the source.
	It's possibly one of the most significant documents of our time, removing the fog of war and revealing the true nature of 21st-century asymmetric warfare.
	Have a good day.
	So that's what Manning probably put in the CD there, right?
	Sorry, guys, I'm yapping a lot, so I'm going to get a drink of water here.
	Give me a listen to chat if you guys are enjoying this.
	Okay, because this is what you guys like.
	You guys like me reading through the documents and giving you all the facts and stuff.
	Manning and Weekly's had reason to believe that the public disclosure of the Afghanistan war reports and Iraq war reports will cause injury to the United States, right?
	So obviously she knew this, right?
	She put it right here.
	Literally put it right here.
	This is possibly some of the most significant documents of our time, right?
	So she kind of sniffs on herself by doing that.
	Okay?
	So let's keep going.
	All right.
	So.
	So let's move a little bit forward here.
	In addition, some of the Afghanistan war reports included detailed reports of IED attacks on the United States enclosed force in Afghanistan.
	The enemy could use these reports to plan future IED attacks because they described IED techniques, devices, and explosives and revealed the countermeasures used by United States coalition force against IED attacks and potential limitations to those countermeasures.
	Oh, Lord.
	So, on May 2nd, 2011, United States government officials raided a compound of Osama Bin Laden.
	During the raid, they collected a number of digital media, which included, among other things, a letter from Bin Laden to another member of the terrorist organization, Al-Qaeda, in which Bin Laden requested that the member gather the DOT material posted to WikiLeaks and a letter from that member of Al-Qaeda to Bin Laden with information about the Afghanistan war reports released by WikiLeaks.
	Oh, man.
	So y'all can see why they were pissed, right?
	So these WikiLeaks documents, right?
	Number one, Bin Laden got his hand on them, right?
	And it gave these documents, gave countermeasures that the United States was using to combat against IEDs.
	As you guys know, IEDs was the leading killer of soldiers in 2003, or well, when the war started in 2003, it was a leading killer, one of the leading killers.
	So obviously, this is a big problem, right?
	Big security breach there.
	And, you know, who knows, guys?
	This could have led to soldiers getting killed.
	I reviewed a number of the Afghanistan war reports and Iraq IV reports that WikiLeaks released.
	The reports that I reviewed contains classification markings reflecting they were classified as secrets.
	Okay.
	All right.
	So now we're going to get into the Iceland documents.
	Okay.
	As further example, Manning also provided WikiLeaks with a number of classified documents relating to Iceland prior to March 2010.
	Oh shit, man.
	Them Europeans about to get exposed.
	Here we go.
	According to Manning, she accessed the NCD portal on February 14th, 2010, and found a cable entitled 10 Raik Javik 13, which addressed an Icelandic issue known as Ice Cave.
	Ice Safe.
	Manning admitted that she burned information on it to a CD on February 15, 2010, took it to her personal housing unit, saved the document to her personal laptop, and then uploaded it to WikiLeaks.
	Wikileaks released this ice save cable on its website on or about February 18, 2010.
	I reviewed the document that WikiLeaks released on its website.
	It contained clear markings reflecting it was classified as confidential.
	Okay, and real quick, just so because so we make sure that we have you guys understand this stuff: classified documents ranking, right?
	So, right, you got different levels, right?
	You got confidential, secret, top secret, and then top secret SCI, right?
	And then you get into like White Hat and all this other shit.
	But those are the three main ones, right?
	But regardless, all this stuff is considered, you need to know in a clearance for it, right?
	That suggests that the version of the IceSafe cable that Manning transmitted to Wikileaks is clear, the fact that it was classified.
	In addition, on February 14, 2010, Manning is using IP1 identified to her, viewed the Intellipedia website for Iceland from this website.
	Manning clicked on links to and viewed three files entitled Sigdor Dorier.
	Okay, a forensic examination of Manning's personal laptop computer showed that a forensic device was inserted into her machine.
	The volume name of the CD indicated the CD was burned on February 15, 2010.
	The file names Johnson.
	Let's see here.
	What was in here?
	Okay.
	On March 29th, 2010, Wikileaks posted on his website classified U.S. State Department biographies of three Icelandic officials.
	Oh shit.
	Icelandic Prime Minister Johanna Sigator, Icelandic Minister of Foreign Affairs and External Trade, User.
	Okay, I'm going to, I'm just going to say OS.
	And Icelandic ambassador to the United States, Albert Johnson.
	I've reviewed the three biographies released by WikiLeaks.
	They contain clear marks indicated that they were classified as confidential.
	So she leaked information that we had on Icelandic officials.
	Oh my god.
	Thus, as examples in these two sessions demonstrate, Manning provided hundreds of thousands of classified documents to WikiLeaks prior to March 2010.
	Wikilies received and published the classified documents despite their clear marks indicating that they were classified.
	So they got Icelandic Prime Minister Johanna, what's her name?
	Sigatur Tour?
	Let's look this woman up real quick.
	Let's see.
	She was snitching on her, man.
	Oh, no.
	Johanna Sigur.
	I know I'm spelling this wrong, but whatever.
	Bruh.
	Hold on.
	Sig.
	Boom.
	Bruh.
	Why is this?
	Oh, it's because all this other crap was in there.
	My bad, guys.
	Here she is.
	This is an Icelandic politician.
	And she was started the prime minister from 2009 to 2013.
	That's not good.
	We probably had some classified stuff on her that they want to know.
	So let's see if it has anything here about stuff that was leaked.
	No.
	Okay.
	All right.
	Let's get back into the complaint.
	All right.
	Manning's chats with Assange.
	Okay, so this is them talking to each other.
	This is probably what jammed her up a lot, too.
	A person assigned a name with the initials NF held a series of online chat conversations with Manning in which the pair discussed providing classified documents to WikiLeaks under protection of Manning's identity and the source of the documents.
	According to the dates on the chats, they occurred between March 5th and March 18, 2010 during the chat conversation.
	Manning used the Alias nobody on the account.
	These chats took place on the Jabber chat server.
	Jabber is used for real-time instant messaging.
	Manning and NF use a Jabber chat service hosted at Jabber.
	It's used for a commonly used acronym for the Berlin-based Chaos Computer Club, which according to accounts on the internet Assange had frequented.
	Okay.
	At her court-martial proceeding, Manning stated that she engaged in conversations often with NF, sometimes as long as an hour or more.
	Forensic analysis showed that Manning deleted or removed the NF chat logs from her laptop.
	Nevertheless, investigators have been able to recover several portions of the chats between Manning and NF, and that's Assange, right?
	So they know that this was Assange.
	At a court martial, Manning claimed that she believed the individual with whom she was chatting was likely Mr. Julian Assange, Mr. Daniel Schmidt, or proxy representative Mr. Assange and Schmidt.
	As summarized below, however, the evidence demonstrated that Assange was the NF who communicated with Manning in March 2010 chats.
	Specific information provided by NF in the March 2010 chats indicates NF was Assange.
	When chatting with Manning on March 5th, 2010, NF confided that he likes debates and that he just finished one on the IMMI and crushed some wretch from the journalist unit.
	NF told Manning that the debate was very satisfying and that the husband of the wretch had exposed a source in IT consults who had given NF 10 gigabytes of banking documents.
	IMMI refers to the Icelandic Modern Media Initiative, a legislative proposal of considerable public interest in Iceland at the time.
	Okay, so I guess this is how they were able to link them through that.
	All right.
	So basically, this is how they were able to identify NF as Assange, right?
	And they go into detail.
	And then the nature of their chats, we could skip that.
	Okay, JTF Gitmo documents.
	Oh, man.
	Okay, so this is Guantanamo Bay.
	We're going to give some good stuff right now.
	Dom de Monco.
	All right.
	So let's see here.
	Yeah, guys, join Council Club.
	If you guys want to be in a chat with haters, get on Castle Club, guys.
	You know, obviously we're going to have haters in the regular chats, whether it's YouTube or Rumble.
	They're going to talk shit and hate on the Council Club.
	And they got funny ass memes that they'd be using in there too, which is hilarious.
	They'd be going crazy in there.
	And like I said before, you support the mission, guys.
	You support the mission.
	Like I said, I'm doing this shit for free right now.
	And Council Club is how we continue to run the podcast.
	They give you guys this free content, right?
	On FedReacts or fresh vlogs or all the other stuff that we do.
	So appreciate it, man.
	And we got a community coming up.
	Like I said before, we're going to probably do a Zoom call.
	We got a podcast tomorrow.
	I think we're going to have Donovan Sharp and Tommy Salto Mayer.
	So that's going to be fucking lit.
	Dom de Monco.
	Yeah, we got big things of God coming as well.
	We're going to be talking about trucking.
	So we're going to help you guys making money there.
	So yeah.
	Anyone that's saying, yeah.
	So, all right.
	Okay.
	So now we're going to get into Guantanamo Bay.
	All right.
	Shout out to the haters that are talking shit about Council Club.
	Really don't.
	If you're not supporting on Castle Club, then I don't know what to tell you, bro.
	You probably don't give a fuck about us.
	And I don't even know why you're watching this content.
	Okay.
	At a court martial proceeding, Manning admitted that she provided WikiLeaks with Joint Task Force Guantanamo detainee assessment briefs in early March 2010.
	And also I want to make it clear, too.
	If you can't afford a Council Club, that's not wrong with that, guys.
	But if you're going to sit there and just talk shit and say it's a scam or any of that other crap, like, fuck you, man.
	Seriously, fuck you.
	Like, I don't even want you in here watching if you're going to say dumb shit like that.
	Like, I really, I don't fuck with you at all.
	Because you guys already know that we got demonetized.
	You know what I mean?
	So it's like, fucking, we're just giving free value, a bunch of value, you know, doing Zoom calls, all that shit.
	In fact, attachment A reflects discussion between Manning and Assange about the value of these documents and Manning's transmission to them to Assange.
	So Manning knew, again, knowledge that what she was transmitting, she shouldn't have been transmitting.
	On March 7th, 2010, Manning asked Assange, how valuable are JTF Gitmo detention memos containing summaries, background info, capture info, etc.
	Assange replied, time period?
	Manning answered 2002 to 2008.
	Assange responded, quite valuable to the lawyers of these guys who are trying to get them out, where those memos suggest their innocence, bad procedure, also valuable to merge into general history.
	Politically, Gitmo is mostly over, though.
	Manning has admitted that after this discussion, she decided to download the dabs.
	On March 8th, 2010, Manning told Assange, I'm sending one last archive of interesting stuff.
	Should be in the X folder at some point in the next 24 hours.
	Assange replied, okay, great.
	Manning added, you'll need to figure out what to do with it all.
	Holy.
	So she knew she was going to send a bunch of shit.
	Later that day, Manning wrote to Assange, anyway, I'm throwing everything I got on JTF Gitmo at you now.
	Should take a while to get up, though.
	Summary history, health conditions, reasons for retaining or transfer of nearly every detainee, 95%.
	Holy.
	And for some of you guys that are wondering, real fast, because I like to make sure that we educate everybody and you guys know exactly what we're talking about here.
	We're going to go over what is Guantanamo Bay, okay?
	Guantanamo Bay detention camp, okay, is a United States military prison within the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base, also referred to as Gitmo, on the coast of the Guantanamo Bay in Cuba.
	As of June 2024, of the 779 people detained there since January 2002 when the military prison first opened after the September 11th attacks, 740 had been transferred elsewhere, 30 remained there, and 9 had died while in custody.
	The camp was established by U.S. President George W. Bush administration in 2002 during the war on terror following the September 11, 2001 attacks.
	Indefinite detention without trial led the operation of this camp to be considered a major breach of human rights by Amnesty International and a violation of the due process clause of the 5th and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution by the Center for Constitutional Rights.
	There were also testimonies of abuse and torture of prisoners.
	So as you guys could see, of course Assange is going to want to go ahead and get this stuff because Guantanamo is something that's extremely controversial.
	Bush's successor, U.S. President Barack Obama, promised, and I remember him campaigning on this back in 2008 when I was in fucking high school, by the way, that he promised he would close the camp in 2010, but met strong bipartisan opposition from the U.S. Congress, which passed laws to prohibit detainees from Guantanamo Obey being transferred to the United States for any reason, including imprisonment or medical care.
	During the Obama administration, the number of inmates was reduced from about 250 to 41.
	In January 2018, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order to keep the detention camp open indefinitely.
	In May 2018, the Trump administration repatriated a prisoner to Saudi Arabia.
	Probably a bunch of diplomatic stuff there.
	Let's see here.
	Now we're going to go back to the doc, to the complaint.
	Assange replied, okay, great.
	Okay.
	Okay.
	Assange inquired if the information, including initial medical evaluation to exit evaluation.
	Also on March 8th, 2010, Manning updated Assange about the ongoing upload, stating that the upload is at about 36%.
	Assange asked for an ETA estimated time of arrival, to which Manning responded in 11 to 12 hours.
	Hey, guys, this is 2010, okay?
	The technology back then wasn't as good as it is now.
	All right.
	Guessing since it's been going for six already, Assange asked, how many MB?
	Manning replied, about 440 megabytes and a lot of scanned PDFs.
	Two days later, on March 10, 2010, Assange reported Manning.
	There's a username in the Gitmo docs and asked, I assume I should filter it out.
	Manning stated that any username should probably be filtered, period.
	Manning didn't recognize, but at the same time, there's a gaze in them.
	Later in the chat, March 10th, 2010, Manning asked, anything useful in there?
	Assange replied, no time, but have someone on it.
	Assange then followed up that there surely will be, and that these sorts of things always motivating to other sources are always motivating to other sources too.
	Assange noted that the disclosure provided inspiration for other leakers because Gitmo equal bad, leakers equal enemy of Gitmo, leakers equal good.
	WikiLeaks ultimately released the JTF Gitmo dabs starting in April of 2011.
	Damn.
	So it took them almost a year to go through the documents, guys.
	That just goes to tell you guys how much they had.
	Took them goddamn a year to fucking put it out, right?
	But August 2011, it released 765 JTF Gitmo dabs.
	As General Robert Carr testified during Manning's court martial, the release of the DABs caused problems for the United States efforts to move detainees out of Guantanamo Bay to other countries.
	According to General Carr, at the time of the release of the DABs, the Department of State was negotiating with foreign governments regarding the transfer of the detainees.
	The relations of the classified dabs threatened to conflict with those negotiations.
	Oh, shit.
	Oh, man.
	Because they probably, because you want to know why I messed up negotiations?
	Because I guarantee you the United States lied about some shit.
	And then that stuff proved what they might have been suspecting, these other countries that were trying to do negotiations from the United States.
	So it put the United States in a very weak position from a negotiation and diplomatic standpoint.
	I reviewed a number of the Gitmo dabs that WikiLeaks released.
	They contained clear marks indicating that they were classified as secrets.
	Assange encourages Manning to continue searching for documents.
	So this is him telling her, hey, we need more shit.
	Manning and Assange discussed concealing source of documents.
	We can skip that.
	Assange acknowledged that Manning was in the U.S. Armed Force in Iraq, so he knew.
	Let's see here.
	Background on password hashes.
	Manning and Assange's agreement to crack the computer password to access classified national security information.
	Yeah, this kind of put him in a bad spot, too, because at that point, he went from journalists to co-conspirator.
	It's one thing if the military official leaks information to you, but if you're actively like, hey, let me help you crack it, then that's where you start to get into trouble, right?
	And I think that's a big reason why the U.S. had a heart on forgetting this guy as well.
	Let's see, let's keep going here.
	Agreement to crack the password.
	Did they go into the details of how they cracked it?
	More of the password stuff.
	Assange flees from justice.
	Okay.
	On May 27, 2010, based on information provided by U.S.2, Army investigators in Iraq took Manning into military custody at FOB Hammer.
	Manning was subsequently charged with a variety of criminal offenses in a military court-martial related to her disclosures to WikiLeaks, including charges alleging unlawful transmission of national defense information in violation of 18 USC 793.
	That's the espionage act, guys.
	Okay.
	Let's see here if we got May 27.
	May 27, 2010.
	Let's see if we can go ahead and get the thing on it.
	Nope.
	Chelsea.
	Chelsea Manning arrested.
	Tonight, Chelsea Manning, the Army whistleblower convicted of leaking.
	And that was back when it was Bradley Manning.
	That's when he got arrested.
	Classified military documents to WikiLeaks is free from prison, posting photos of her first steps and meal pizza, saying whatever is ahead of me is far more important than the past.
	I'm figuring things out right now, which is exciting, awkward, fun, and all new for me.
	Manning served just seven years of a 35-year sentence.
	President Obama commuting the rest is one of his final acts in office, saying 35 years was disproportionate to what others convicted of similar crimes have received.
	I feel very comfortable that justice has been served.
	Among the most explosive of the nearly 750,000 files and cables leaked by Manning, this video.
	That was the big one.
	As you guys know, the U.S. Army helicopter attack in Iraq that killed 11 people, including two journalists.
	And sensitive State Department cables, the government says, endangered informants working overseas.
	President and definitely messed with Hillary too.
	Trump has called Manning a traitor who should have never been released.
	Chelsea Manning, formerly known as Bradley Manning, came out as transning, came out as transgender the day after sentencing, tried to commit suicide twice behind bars, and went on a hunger strike to protest her treatment.
	Tonight, a free woman, she is appealing her conviction and says she looks forward to starting her new life.
	Blake McCoy, NBC News.
	Julian Assange joins me now live from his safe room in the Ecuadorian embassy.
	In London, I'm also joined here in studio by his lawyer.
	And just so you guys know, so what ended up happening was Julian Assange.
	Actually, you know what?
	Julian Assange joins me now live from his safe room in the Ecuadorian embassy.
	In London, I'm also joined here in studio by his lawyer.
	I watched the video on this.
	Okay.
	So we're going to go through his timeline here.
	This is a quick little summary here.
	It's only about three minutes.
	Okay, so you guys know.
	We went over some of the facts, but we're going to go back to the complaint here in a second.
	So 2006, Assange forms WikiLeaks in Australia and begins publishing classified and other sensitive material.
	Bam.
	April 20th to July 2010.
	WikiLeaks began releasing hundreds of thousands of classified documents related to the U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, which you guys saw in intimate detail what he released thanks to Manning giving him those documents, which we read through in the criminal complaint, which goes into more detail.
	Stuff was secret, confidential, top secret, etc.
	All came from me.
	The documents were provided by Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, then known as Bradley Manning.
	August 2010, prosecutors in Sweden announced that an arrest warrant has been issued for Assange after two women accused him of grape.
	LOL, we all know that that wasn't true.
	But so Assange denied the charges, right?
	Because his claim was that it was consensual sex.
	But he knew that the real reason they had these charges was because if they went over there to Sweden, they would have definitely sent him over to the United States.
	So Assange, he surrenders to the police in London in response to the Swedish arrest warrant.
	He's released on bail pending an extradition hearing.
	Now, he knows at this time, guys, that there's a good chance that he's going to get indicted in the United States.
	So a British magistrate court orders Assange to be extradited to Sweden.
	Assange appeals the ruling because he didn't want to go to Sweden because he knew what would happen.
	So June 2012, Assange takes refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and asks for political asylum after his appeal efforts are unsuccessful.
	All right.
	So he went into the he literally said, hey, I'm claiming asylum.
	You guys need to protect me, man, because I'm a journalist.
	I go to Sweden.
	I guarantee they're going to turn me over to the Americans.
	And obviously we know right off the criminal complaint.
	Uh, this is 20, 2017.
	So So he knew he was going to get arrested.
	He was going to get indicted at some point, but he didn't get indicted yet.
	Right?
	So he gets a political asylum in the embassy in August.
	And then he lived there, guys, for years.
	So Swedish authorities dropped the grape and grape charges against Assange, his attorney.
	Per semi-sakausa decision, a total victory.
	Yeah, because we knew it was Cap Bro.
	We knew he wasn't fucking.
	We knew it was bullshit.
	Because Assange was very paranoid during this time, guys.
	Even though he hadn't been charged yet, he knew at some point that America was going to come knocking.
	Right?
	So British authorities, so April 2019, British authorities arrested Assange.
	That's from the videos I showed you guys before at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, and he is sentenced to 50 weeks in prison for skipping bail.
	Now, I know you guys are wondering, like, yo, what the fuck happened?
	Well, what ended up happening, guys, is a new president came in and he basically said, yo, we're going to suspend the political asylum.
	So they let the Brits come in and arrest him.
	Oh, just so you guys know, while he was there, they spied on him.
	Okay?
	While he was there the whole time, right?
	I'll play a little bit of this documentary because they're going to start bitching on YouTube again.
	Right?
	Valence video obtained by Spanish newspaper El País.
	He's seen in shorts and a tank top.
	Skateboarding.
	The conspiracy of Shanks begins in December 2017.
	And they just were recording him, you know, all over the place.
	Meeting with meetings with his lawyer.
	He's eating food while he's exercising.
	It's not to monitor Julian Assange, but to protect Julian Assange and protect the embajada because he was being the object of vigilance.
	That was one of his lawyers.
	This dude speaks in Spanish.
	This is one of his lawyers out of Spain, international lawyer.
	Hay un cambio esencial que es cuando Rafael Correa deja de ser presidente de Ecuador.
	So this new president that came into power ended up rescinding the political asylum for Assange.
	Julian, de su ámbito más íntimo.
	So they were recording him.
	Look, he's just chilling and shit.
	They got all this on footage, man.
	and when he was meeting with his lawyers and all of his guests.
	He couldn't go outside at all, guys, because he knew if he went outside at any time, the British police would arrest him.
	And it was the intelligence agencies that were recording him.
	Julian Assange is monitoring.
	They even put a camera in the girls' bathroom, guys.
	Fucking wild.
	He was there for five years, guys.
	No, seven years, guys.
	From 2012 to 2019, he was there for seven years.
	He didn't leave that embassy.
	Fucking crazy, man.
	So 24 hours a day on the job, a small Spanish security company, UC Global.
	So yeah.
	So let's go ahead and go into Assange's thoughts on Manning.
	Boy, Barry Pollock, we're less than 24 hours from finding out Manning's fate, Julian.
	You are, of course, somewhat confined, staying as you are in the embassy, but you're not in jail, which is where Manning may find himself living out the rest of his life.
	Do you feel so?
	This is right when Manning was about to get sentenced.
	YouTube is down again.
	No, it's not.
	Or is it?
	Oh, hold on.
	Hold on.
	Let me look.
	It is down.
	Bro, what the hell?
	It's literally, I had it for like two minutes.
	It's fine.
	I just won't use that documentary again.
	Don't worry about it, guys.
	We'll be back here in a second.
	I'll read some of these chats.
	YouTube is whack.
	All right, let me see here.
	Yeah, I was just reacting too.
	I didn't even really play that much of it.
	Let's see here.
	All right.
	We'll play the CNN video here.
	So we're going to get Manning's, sorry, Assange's thoughts on Manning.
	Any sense of responsibility, any sense of guilt?
	What are your feelings on the eve of this verdict?
	Well, look, as the publisher involved in this case, there's no doubt that our publishing activities are connected in some way to Bradley Manning's fate.
	That's provided the embarrassment that the U.S. government is working against.
	But first, let's contextualize.
	We heard lots of spin back in 2011, 2012 with people from Congress like Peter T. King placing bills for all our staff.
	And this is right before Manning gets before Manning got charged.
	As you guys know, they got when were they sentenced?
	when was he sentenced uh so sometime in like 27 uh 2013 ish he got sentenced so So.
	And this was posted when?
	July 29th, 2013.
	Okay.
	To be renditioned declared enemy combatants before the Congress.
	And at that time, there were accusations that the material that we had published might, in some sense, lead to people coming to hell.
	Those have all been false.
	There's been no accusation in this entire case that any person has come to harm as a result of any of our publications, which are alleged to be derived from Bradley Manning.
	they're quite the converse uh there's um i miss the international reports that uh there's an echo you said guys There shouldn't be no echo.
	Bene-eli regime in Tunisia, its overthrow by the people was directly triggered by these sorts of publications.
	And similarly, there's a wide range of investigations and prosecutions of individuals for torture, resignations of different figures in various places in the world as a result of corruption.
	Do you think, Duli, do you think the list of accomplishments, the Arab Spring and the other things you've talked about, do you think that is ultimately worth potentially the rest of this young man's life?
	Well, it's not my place to weigh that up.
	Obviously, that's something that Bradley Manning has to weigh up.
	But the alleged statements that he made, yeah, he was willing to take that risk from his alleged statements because he believes apparently that the result is so important.
	And we call those types of people that are willing to risk, not be a martyr, but to risk being a martyr.
	And that's Army CID guys right there.
	So let's go back to the complaint, right?
	So on July 30th, 2013, Manning was convicted of most of the charges, including unlawful gathering of transmission and national defense information, computer treasure, and theft of government property.
	They were acquitted of aiding the enemy.
	And then meanwhile, beginning as early as November 2010 and as of late 2017, media outlets reported that the Department of Justice was investigating charges against WikiLeaks or Assange in connection with the disclosures by Manning.
	On November 20, 2010, in connection with unrelated charges in Sweden, an international arrest warrant was issued against Assange, which I talked to you guys about before.
	Supreme Court determined that Sweden's extradition had been fully lawfully made in the UK.
	Had 10 days to take Assange to Sweden.
	Instead of appealing to the European Court of Human Rights in June 2012, Assange fled to the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
	Ecuador formally granted Assange diplomatic asylum on August 16, 2010, citing his well-founded fears of political prosecution, persecution, and the possibility of death penalty where he sent to the United States.
	So he knew back then, right, that there was probably a criminal case against him in the United States.
	Specifically, Assange feared that if he were to be sent to the U.S. said, he might be prosecuted, perhaps executed by a military court in regard to his involvement in the release of stolen and leaked American documents and his crimes in Afghanistan and Iraq.
	Which, because as you guys know, treason carries the death penalty in the United States, right?
	Assange has made numerous comments reflecting that he took refuge in the Ecuadorian embassy to avoid extradition and charge of the United States.
	For example, in 2013, a WikiLeaks website posted an affidavit by Assange concerning alleged monitoring of his activities and search and seizure of his property.
	In this affidavit, Assange acknowledged that he was granted asylum after a formal assessment by the government of Ecuador in relation to the current and future risk of persecution and cruel, inhumane, inhuman, and degrading treatment of the United States in response to my publishing activities and my political opinions.
	So, May 19, 2017, in response to Sweden's decision to discontinue his investigation regarding suspected grape by Julian, Assange publicly stated, Well, today was an important victory and an important vindication.
	The road is far from over.
	The war, the proper war, is just commencing, right?
	Now, the United States CIA Director Pompeo.
	Now, guys, remember, fast forward to 2017, Trump's in office now.
	Okay, Obama's no longer in office.
	And the U.S. Attorney General said that I and other WikiLeaks staff have no rights.
	We have no First Amendment rights, and my arrest and the arrest of our staff is a priority.
	The UK refuses to confirm or deny at this stage whether a U.S. extradition warrant is already in the UK territory.
	So, this is a dialogue that we want to happen.
	Similarly, with the United States, there have been extremely threatening remarks made.
	I am always happy to engage in a dialogue with the Department of Justice about what occurred, right?
	So, this is a conclusion of affidavit went over everything.
	So, signed it December 21st, right?
	Then he gets indicted, right?
	This was the first indictment, if I'm not mistaken, right?
	So, right here, we're back on YouTube, Ninjas.
	I heard we're back.
	Okay, cool.
	So, yeah, and don't worry, guys.
	When you watch this on the playback on YouTube, it'll show.
	So, here's the indictment, right?
	Conspiracy to commit, computer intrusion.
	Right?
	So, he gets indicted, and you guys know an indictment is a formal charge, right?
	And they indicted him here.
	Then they hit him with the superseding indictment later on, right?
	Three years later.
	This is where they hit him with the real charges: 18 USC 793, conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information, conspiracy, you know, more espionage charges.
	All these 18 USC 793 charges you guys see are all under the Espionage Act, okay?
	Then, you guys can see here: motion to dismiss.
	On March 6, 2018, the defendant was indicted by a federal grand jury in this district on one count on May 23rd, 2019.
	The defendant was indicted on a superseding indictment by a grand jury district and on 18 counts.
	And then, on June 24, 2020, the defendant was indicted in a second superseding indictment by a grand jury in this district on 18 counts.
	That's what I showed you guys before.
	On June 26, 2024, the defendant pleaded guilty to a criminal information in U.S. District Court for the Northern Mariana Islands in case number 124 CR, blah, blah, blah.
	Pursuant to the plea agreement in that case, which is attached to this motion, as example one, the government moves to dismiss the indictment filed on March 6, 2018, et cetera, right?
	And here is the plea agreement, guys.
	Here it is right here, right?
	And he did this for the Northern Mariana Islands.
	This was in Saipon, aka Guam, okay?
	And here's a plea agreement.
	Let's go ahead and enlarge this bad boy for y'all so you guys can see what the hell is going on here.
	So, here's the plea agreement, right?
	I don't think anyone else has broken this down.
	So, we went over the criminal complaint.
	We went over the multiple indictments.
	He had one indictment and two superseding indictments.
	And then the government finally moved to get it dismissed.
	So, here's the plea agreement, right?
	And here's the information that he pled guilty to.
	Here's the criminal information, right?
	So, basically, this is what ended up happening, okay?
	So, let me explain this to you guys.
	So, first, he gets hit with a criminal complaint, okay?
	And a criminal complaint, as you guys know, is an affidavit written by a special agent from a law enforcement agency that outlines all the facts, just like I went over here with you guys, right?
	In this case, it was special agent Megan Brown from the FBI, right?
	It outlines all the facts, and then they get an arrest warrant.
	They get that arrest warrant, and they go pick the person up.
	Now, with that said, Assange was in the UK at this point, right?
	And they held him there for five years.
	He gets arrested in 2019, he didn't get released until recently, right?
	Because they were trying to extradite him from the United States, or excuse me, they were trying to extradite him from the United Kingdom to the United States, right?
	And I'm going to talk about the extradition process here in a little bit.
	Then, while he was in jail in UK prison, awaiting extradition, they indicted him here for the conspiracy because after you get hit with a criminal complaint, guys, you need to be indicted shortly thereafter.
	So, in this case, this criminal complaint was in December.
	They end up indicting him later on in March, right?
	Then they give him the superseding indictment, right?
	Which is here, right?
	The big boy on two different occasions, one in 2018, and then I think the one in 2020, right?
	Then they dismissed it, right?
	They dismissed it right here for the Eastern District of Virginia.
	They dismissed those cases against him.
	So the criminal complaint, the indictments, all that stuff, dismissed, right?
	Then they filed an information.
	Okay, guys, which are criminal information to simplify it for you guys, it's a official charging document sent by the United States Attorney.
	Okay?
	So on one end, you've got a criminal complaint that's written by a special agent, filed with a judge.
	Then you got a criminal information, which is filed through the United States Attorney, right?
	Or an assistant United States attorney that's signed off by a U.S. Attorney, the prosecutor.
	And an information, guys, nine out of ten times, one of two things.
	Either one, they're cooperating and they're snitching, or B, it's like this situation here where they came to an agreement and they're going to plead guilty, right?
	So whenever you get hit with an information, nine out of ten times, that means they're cooperating.
	Pro tip for you guys, okay?
	So that so they dismissed the criminal complaint out of the Eastern District of Virginia.
	Then they hit him with an information in the Northern Mariana Islands.
	Why is that?
	Because that's where he was going to fly to to plead guilty to the information.
	Okay?
	So they hit him with just one charge, conspiracy to obtain and disclose national defense information, right?
	The most basic one.
	So here's the information, right?
	Which basically summarizes all the crap we ran in the criminal complaint to some degree.
	This is count one of it, right?
	Which we went over already.
	Now we're going to add, now we're going to get into that's the information.
	Now we're going to get into the plea agreement, right?
	Which is right here, okay?
	Out of the Northern Mariana Islands, United States District Court, which is basically Guam.
	So the defendant, Julian Paul Assange, agrees to waive indictment by a grand jury in this district and agrees to plead guilty to an information charging the defendant with a conspiracy.
	Oh, by the way, give me ones in the chat if that made sense.
	Give me ones in the chat if criminal complaints, indictment, and information made sense.
	I literally explained all three of them in one.
	So give me ones if that made sense.
	If you guys, if it doesn't make sense, give me twos.
	And then tell me specifically why it doesn't make sense so I can answer that question.
	I really want y'all to understand this and get some education out of this, baby.
	You know what I'm saying?
	So comment ones or twos.
	All right.
	Cool, cool, cool.
	All right.
	So it makes sense for y'all.
	All right.
	And if you're confused by what explained, give me twos, and then I'll be happy to explain it.
	But I literally, I think that's a great.
	Yo, somebody clicked that.
	Literally explained a criminal complaint, an indictment, a superseding indictment, and then an information.
	So they dismissed all the indictments out of the Eastern District of Virginia, hit him with an information in the Mariana Islands, and then they made him plead guilty in the Mariana Islands.
	Okay, because it's federal.
	They can do that.
	Okay, the defendant understands that this is a felony which carries a maximum penalty of not more than 10-year term to imprisonment, not more than a 10-year term of imprisonment, a fine not to exceed $250,000, blah, blah, blah.
	Effect on immigration status.
	The federal recognized that pleading guilty may have consequences in respect to the defendant's immigration status.
	The defendant is not a citizen of the United States under federal law.
	And they put this for anyone that's a foreign national, right?
	So he can't come to the United States ever.
	Not that he would want to, right?
	The court's role in plea and sentencing procedure.
	Who gives a fuck about that?
	Waiver of Constitutional Rights.
	So he's waiving, obviously, going to trial because he's pleading guilty.
	Discovery.
	Yeah, so he's giving up discovery because the case is pretty much done.
	He's pleading guilty.
	And then venue.
	Yeah, so he consents to being charged in the district of North Mariana Islands, right?
	Because this is obviously not the Eastern District of Virginia where he was originally charged.
	So he's waiving that.
	Statute of limitations.
	He's waiving that.
	Elements of the offense.
	Basically, this is the United States talking about how they got him, you know, dead to rights, right?
	On the elements of the thing.
	Factual basis of the statement of facts, right?
	And then they basically summarize what him and Chelsea Manning did, right?
	Which we broke that down into criminal complaint.
	No need to go through that again.
	Let's see here.
	Went into detail.
	More facts of the case.
	Don't worry about it.
	We went over this already.
	Guantanamo Bay, Afghanistan, Iraq, to include that video that you guys saw.
	Okay, acceptance of responsibility.
	As a result of this agreement, the defendant will enter a plea of guilty and then criminal history.
	Yeah, he's not going to get an adjustment of the criminal history because, yeah, because he's never served, been arrested before for it.
	Okay.
	The parties agree further.
	Defendant entered Belmarsh under about 11.
	What the hell?
	Okay, the parties appear that the defendant is not entitled to credit for time served.
	Okay, for the entire period, he has been incarcerated.
	Boom.
	So, okay.
	Okay, I kind of jumped the gun there.
	But yeah, so him serving time in England counts as time served, guys.
	Okay, so he was incarcerated at His Majesty's Prison Belmarsh, the category A men's prison at Thames Mead, London, England, Belmarsh.
	The parties further agree that the defendant entered Belmarsh on or about April 11, 2019, and at that time of this agreement has served approximately 62 months in prison.
	So about five years.
	Okay, so that counts as time served, right?
	Let's see here.
	Supervised release, restitution, plea agreement.
	Let's see anything else here.
	Delay in proceedings.
	Anything else here?
	Other delays.
	Okay, that's if he withdraws.
	And this is what a standard plea agreement looks like.
	Okay, penalty assessment, $100.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, okay, if he gets into trouble for other laws, appeal, waiver of FOIA and active rights.
	Oh, damn.
	Okay, so he can't get FOIA.
	He can't request FOIA.
	Okay, that's interesting for them to put that in here.
	Hyde Amendment.
	18 statutory for attorneys fees.
	Okay.
	The defendant agrees in covenants that he or any person or entity acting on his behalf, including.
	Okay, let's see here.
	Anything else here?
	Integration clause.
	All right, so here we go.
	Sean Anderson, that's the United States Attorney.
	Matthew McKenzie.
	And then here's Assange.
	He signed it.
	June 24, 2024.
	There's this thing, that's a signature.
	That's the thing.
	A lot of this is on his immigration stuff that he can't come to the United States ever, blah, blah, blah.
	So this is him, guys, after he walked out the court in Guam.
	Here he is, ladies and gentlemen.
	Enjoy your time.
	There he is.
	How does it feel to be a free man, Mr. Sans?
	How do you feel about the sentence, sir?
	Quick comment about the sentence, sir.
	What's your message to the press, sir?
	What's your message to the press, sir?
	What's your message to Jeremy Foster and the world today, Mr. Sam?
	Do you think this is served, sir?
	Keep on me, keep on me.
	Can I give you one, sir?
	Sit there.
	Can I give you one of our shirts, please?
	What do you say to those who still think you're a hero who's in the side?
	Boom, boom, boom.
	Out the way.
	All right.
	Ow.
	Don't power.
	Anybody tell me your son?
	How many in this one?
	All right.
	So, and then this is him when he lands in Australia.
	How does it feel to be a free man, Mr. Sans?
	Now, walking free after pleading guilty to violating U.S. espionage law.
	Assange court on the end.
	His release ends a 14-year legal saga in which Assange spent more than five years in a British high security.
	So, two days later, he lands in Australia.
	As you guys saw, he signed it on about, I think, the 24th.
	Security prison and seven years in asylum at the Ecuadorian embassy in London, battling extradition to the United States, where he faced 18 criminal charges.
	There's his wife.
	It took millions of people.
	It took people working behind the scenes.
	People protesting on the streets for days and weeks and months and years.
	And we achieved it.
	Julian.
	Julian wanted me to sincerely.
	And guys, he was on lockdown for more than five years.
	He was in jail for five years, but he was stuck in that embassy for seven.
	So, woo.
	Surely thank everyone.
	He wanted to be here.
	But you have to understand.
	Basically, 12 years in jail almost.
	And what he's been through.
	He needs time.
	He needs to reuperate and this is a process.
	I ask you please to give us space, to give us privacy, to find our place, to let our family be a family before he can speak again at a time of his choosing.
	It's important that journalists all around the world understand the dangerous precedent that this prosecution has set.
	An award winning Australian journalist who's been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for these publications has spent more than five years in a high-security prison because of this extradition request from the United States.
	This is a huge win for Australia and for Australian democracy.
	This is a huge win for free speech.
	This is a huge win for Australia that our Prime Minister stood up to our ally, the United States, and demanded.
	And there you go, my friends.
	I fucking said this.
	I called this before this even came out.
	When Julian Assange first pled guilty to this, I literally called it, I said a component as to why he is getting this deal is because he's an Australian national and he is from a five eyes country.
	Okay?
	Now, some of you guys in the chat are probably like, what the fuck are you talking about, Myron?
	Five Eyes.
	What the fuck?
	I got two.
	So guys, there's an alliance between in the intelligence world, okay?
	Between the five eyes, okay?
	United States, Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United Kingdom.
	Okay?
	The five world powers that are English speaking, okay?
	They work together in the intel world.
	Okay.
	So they definitely lobbied to get him back.
	Okay.
	And I'm going to talk about a bunch of other factors that led to this as well.
	I'm going to give you guys my breakdown on this fully.
	But yeah.
	Under the return of an Australian citizen.
	His arrival home ends a long running.
	Boom.
	There's the Australian Prime Minister right there, Anthony Albanese.
	Legal process.
	He described it as a surreal and happy moment.
	He's landing here in our national capital, Canberra.
	I mean, if the Prime Minister is giving a statement on it, that tells you, yes, the Australian government absolutely lobbied to get him out.
	cherry on the top of a very, very handsome birthday cake, you know, that Julian, that's his dad.
	Look how much he's aged, man.
	Can come home.
	Compared to what I showed you in the first documentary.
	To Australia and see his family regularly and do the ordinary things of life.
	He's a treasure.
	He's obviously gained a lot of weight from the stress probably of being in jail.
	Life measured amongst the beauty of the ordinary is the essence of the art.
	It's cold in Canberra, but I'll get a brave cold because Julian's been in jail for five years.
	So I think to show support and make sure that when he got off the plane, he saw that people were behind him and he had support.
	I think it was important that a small group of people came here and actually greeted him when he came off the plane.
	Oh, it's great news.
	Obviously, it's just been way too long.
	I feel he's just been held accountable for more.
	And in hindsight, he's been punished more than what he needed to be.
	So, you know, it's great news for him.
	It's great news for his family.
	It's great news for all of the supporters in Australia.
	I think everybody wanted to see this and wanted to see it a long time ago.
	All right.
	So he's back home.
	And this is obviously where he was, guys.
	For some of you guys who are wondering, this is Saipan, right?
	Out there in the middle of fucking nowhere, by the way.
	It's like guam, basically.
	Yeah.
	Yeah, you guys can see he's like, what the hell?
	Yeah, it's out there.
	But yeah.
	Let me see here if we got anything else that we need to show.
	Yeah, this was this thing on Chelsea Manning.
	Well, Chelsea Manning also supported him as well.
	She wanted him free as well.
	Jesse Manning, let's see here.
	Speak.
	I think she was loving to get him out, too.
	Yeah, let's see why she did it then.
	This is from a year ago.
	When the world first came to know Chelsea Manning in 2010, she was just 22 years old, an army intelligence analyst and a whistleblower.
	We shook up everything we thought we knew about U.S. wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
	She leaked hundreds of thousands of classified documents to WikiLeaks.
	Now, to some, Manning is a hero.
	To others, she's a traitor.
	But after serving seven years in a military prison, including time in solitary, she was granted freedom when then President Obama commuted her sentence in 2017.
	Chelsea Manning is now trying to reclaim the narrative about why she did and what she did in a new memoir titled ReadMe.text.
	Chelsea Manning joins us now.
	Thank you so much for joining me.
	Thank you.
	So the book is about offering your side of the story about why you leaked 750,000 documents classified insensitive to WikiLeaks.
	What ultimately do you think pushed you to take that extreme step?
	Right.
	So what I think it boiled down to was this incredible discrepancy, this like cognitive dissonance that I had between what the public was, I consider myself a very educated and informed member of the public prior to enlisting the military and deploying to Iraq in 2010.
	But there was this discrepancy between what we had access to in the public versus what I actually finally saw on the ground and what we as a collective were really sort of seeing on the ground and experiencing every single day.
	One of the things that seemed to motivate your action, you write in the book that, quote, we, the occupying military force, didn't actually give a F about the Iraqi people.
	I have to say, that's a pretty sweeping thing to say about thousands of service members.
	I know men and women who served in Iraq who absolutely cared about the Iraqi people.
	Yeah, that is a general statement, but a general sentiment.
	But yeah, what I encountered was the majority of people, we seem to care less about the civilian population and we put ourselves first, which makes sense to an extent.
	But I also got the sense that even whenever we were saying that trying to protect or have some kind of involvement of the host nation nationals, if you will, seemed to fall to the wayside or be seen as more of a nuisance than as something that we should be concerned about.
	So the Wikileaks happened in 2010 in an interview that year by a British television station, Channel 4, its Taliban spokesman said the group would punish Afghan nationals working for the U.S. that are named in the WikiLeaks logs.
	Now, I don't know of any who have actually been harmed.
	Right.
	But did that not worry you at all?
	I mean, there are individual Afghans and Iraqis who were working with the U.S. trying to help their country and they were being named and it might put them in jeopardy to have their names leaked.
	This actually got fleshed out through the court-martial process.
	We were obviously given discovery and evidence.
	And those statements were made in 2010 and 2011.
	But as we came to find out later, there were no informants' names and anything.
	So I think that this was an accident or at least an assumption made on the part of the information review task force that was put together, where they made a statement that it could put people's harms, could put people in harm's way.
	But I was very careful in not identifying what is called source identifying information, which is covered under a very different classification and protocol system.
	There are a lot of traumatizing experiences that you write about from your childhood, from the military, from your prison time.
	One that I had not heard you speak about before is that you are a survivor of sexual assault while in the military.
	Last month, as you may know, in a confidential survey, some 36,000 service members said they had been victims of sexual assault.
	Reports were up 13% last year.
	That's just what's being reported, of course.
	There are victims out there who like you feel like they can't report it because no one will believe them or no one will care.
	Tell us about that.
	So yeah, while I was in the military, and especially under Don't Ask, Don't Tell, because this was with a, and I was identifying, or I was presenting as male, and the other person was a male.
	So this would have been, even any kind of relation whatsoever that happened in that timeframe would have been impermissible.
	And also, this was an officer and then enlisted an encounter, and it became a non-consensual encounter.
	And my immediate instinct was to hide it, to cover it up, and to pretend that it didn't happen.
	And it started to eat at me.
	I'm so sorry that happened.
	You dedicate this memoir to trans kids.
	Over the past year, we've seen a lot of legislation about trans kids.
	I'm wondering what you would say to any of the lawmakers introducing these bills keeping trans kids from the bathrooms they want to use or being who they are.
	What you would say to these lawmakers?
	I mean, I have less of a message for the lawmakers and more of a message to the kids, which the lawmakers can hear if they so choose, which is that, you know, like we've faced reactionary waves, you know, reactionary attacks against the queer and trans community throughout history, you know, whether it be the HIV and AIDS pandemic, whether it be under the Reagan administration with Anita Bryant and moral majority.
	We've faced this before, and I faced my own, you know, like sort of reactionary rollbacks before in my own life.
	That, you know, even regardless of what the law says, you are valued as a human being.
	You're valued as a person.
	And we have survived these kinds of things and progressed past these things, even whenever things do get rolled back.
	So even though I do expect that the rollbacks will continue, I hope to bring at least some light into thinking about the future and the optimism that I have towards getting past this because we've survived as a community.
	All right, Chelsea Manning, thank you so much.
	Thank you, Jake.
	I didn't really give a valid reason, but that's fine.
	I guess because whatever.
	Okay.
	So guys, we're on YouTube, so I'm not going to say it all.
	So guys, tomorrow we got Donovan Sharp in the house with Tommy Sotomayor.
	That was going to be a good time.
	And then we're also going to go ahead and have a Zoom call probably with Castle Club after the fact.
	And yeah, we're going to give you guys a three P. We're going to have after hours for you guys.
	We're going to have, obviously, Tommy and Donovan, and we're going to do a Money Monday on how to get into the trucking business, guys.
	So it's going to be Liddy.
	It's going to be a good time.
	Let me see here if I got any chats I got to read before we close this thing up.
	Essay.
	Oh, yeah.
	Okay.
	I see, Alexia, what you're saying.
	I would read that chat more on YouTube, bro.
	Okay, let's see here.
	You know how YouTube is, unfortunately.
	Assange also saved us from Hilliard.
	Do you think the Pizza Gate thing is real?
	I don't know enough about Pizza Gate, man.
	I'm going to look into it some more, though.
	Cool.
	So guys, I think that will do it for tonight's stream.
	Give me ones in the chat if you guys learned.
	We talked about a lot of things.
	We talked about what a criminal complaint is, indictment, superseding indictment, information, waiving a case.
	We read through the indictment.
	We talked about what confidential, secret, and top secret is.
	We went over all the facts and circumstances.
	So give me ones if y'all learned something today.
	I hope you guys did.
	I enjoyed breaking this case down.
	Oh, God, how can I almost forget?
	So let me give you guys why I think a lot of people have spoken on the community.
	They want you to do IRL Change My Mind segment once a week.
	All right, cool.
	We will do it.
	We will do that on Fridays, probably.
	Change my mind stuff.
	Okay, so here, guys, is my take on this investigation, okay?
	And why they decided to go ahead and just, you know, take the one simple, you know, guilty plea and let him go.
	So multiple reasons.
	Number one, the extradition process.
	Let's talk about that.
	So guys, the extradition process is extremely time consuming.
	Someone clicked this, by the way, okay?
	And I'm going to go into why I suspect they let Julian Assange off with just a guilty plea, one charge of, you know, of the Espanage Act.
	The extradition process, guys, is extremely taxing.
	You have to do something called an MLAT, okay?
	Which I think it stands for Mutual Lateral Agreement Treaty.
	Let me look this up real quick.
	MLAT.
	Yeah, MLAT.
	Yeah, Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty.
	All right, close enough.
	Which is agreement between countries to share information and assist each other in enforcing criminal or public laws.
	These treaties allow law enforcement prosecutors to obtain evidence, information, and testimony from other countries that can be used in the courts of the requested country, right?
	So you have to fill out an MLAT, right, guys?
	You have to fill out an MLAT to get someone extradited.
	And it's very difficult to get someone extradited because extradition depends on a couple of different factors.
	Number one, it depends on the crime.
	Number two, it depends on the country that you're extraditing them from.
	Number three, it depends on the nationality of the individual that you're trying to extradite.
	Okay?
	So then also, it also depends on the aggression of your assistant United States Attorney's Office, right?
	So if they're not aggressive, they're not going to put in all the work it takes to get this done because MLATs are something that's almost exclusively done by the AUSA's office, right?
	So it's not easy to do.
	It could take years, guys, to do an extradition through an MLAT, right?
	So at this point, he had served five years in jail.
	So they're looking at it like, okay, are we going to continue to do this taxing, cumbersome, annoying process of an MLAT for an Australian national who, like I suspected, I predicted this correctly on X, the Australian government doesn't want to give to the United States, right?
	Because the Australian government knows if he goes to the United States, he might go to trial.
	If he goes to trial, there's a good chance he might get executed for these crimes.
	Because guys, the Espionage Act carries, you could get a life sentence or get the death penalty for it, okay?
	So it's not a good look for an Australian citizen to get extradited in the United States, found guilty of the Espionage Act, and then killed.
	And then on top of that, he's a journalist.
	Okay?
	That's the real big one.
	At the end of the day, he's a journalist, right?
	So if you're going to fall anybody, it's Manning.
	It's not Assange to the same degree.
	Now, granted, we read through the complaint.
	Assange actively helped him hack into one of the databases, right?
	Which is why the United States was so pissed off at him, part of it, right?
	Obviously, and also leaking that video of the Iraq shooting, right?
	But they're looking at it like, look, you guys already got your person with Manning.
	She did her time.
	She went to the court martial, all that, right?
	Give us back Assange.
	That's what I guarantee the Australian government lobbied for because the prime minister wouldn't be doing no fucking press release for a terrible criminal, right?
	So that, I think, saved him.
	And then on top of that, from the U.S. government perspective, so the U.S. government is kind of seeing this year that prosecuting people on political matters is an L. What do I mean by this?
	Look at Donald Trump.
	Donald Trump goes ahead and gets indicted in four different districts.
	Okay?
	He got indicted in New York.
	He got indicted in Georgia, right?
	Two state cases on the RICO case in Georgia and then the False Line Business Records in New York.
	Then he got indicted out of Washington, D.C. for the insurrection stuff.
	And then he got indicted in Florida for the national defense documents, right?
	He got convicted in New York, as you guys know, not too long ago.
	What happens?
	He raises $100 million in a couple of days, right?
	He gets indicted.
	He goes up in the polls.
	The January 6ers, they just recently, you know, reversed some case law on the laws on the January 6th cases.
	I was actually going to cover that today.
	I might do that next week for you guys, right?
	So think of it from the U.S. government's perspective, right?
	Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice is looking at this like, okay, we indicted Trump and it backfired.
	We put these January 6ers in jail and it backfired.
	There's an enormous amount of positive response for Julian Assange and he's a journalist and the Australian government is lobbying for him to be returned home.
	Is it really to our benefit to extradite him here, go to trial, spend money, spend more time when it's going to make us look bad because we're prosecuting a journalist.
	We're putting him in jail.
	He could face the death penalty.
	The Australian government, one of our allies, wants him back.
	And we already backfired on ourselves with the Trump in the January 6th case.
	So if I'm Merrick Garland over at the Department of Justice, I'm like, man, fuck this shit.
	Dismiss the case out of Eastern District of Virginia.
	Let's get this guy a plea agreement.
	Let's still get our W, because guys, make no mistake about it.
	A plea agreement is a W, right?
	Because federal cases normally don't lose.
	Getting him to plead guilty is still a W for the United States Attorney's Office, right?
	Still a stat, positive stat.
	Let's get him to plead guilty.
	Get him the fuck out of here.
	Send him back to Australia, right?
	We get some CIA guys to kill him later, right?
	Which I, which I've already concerned for my safety, right?
	Because, you know, I wouldn't be surprised if the intel agencies wouldn't try to merc him later on.
	But for now, I think he'll be safe for at least another two, three years.
	You know, they're going to merc him when no one cares anymore, obviously, right?
	Or they're going to try.
	But sitting back, watching this, it makes the most sense for the U.S. government to move this way.
	It doesn't make sense to continue processing him.
	Sorry, it doesn't make sense to continue the extradition process and the MLA process and bring him over to the United States and face a trial and also the bullshit when Australians want him back.
	That's an ally, right?
	If he was from another country, it might be a little bit different.
	But I guarantee the Australian government absolutely lobbied to get him back.
	And the human rights lawyer even said it, that the Australian prime minister stood up to the U.S. government to get him back.
	So, you know, and then also, it was done, someone mentioned this earlier.
	I think the Biden administration also said, you know what, bro, let's get him back.
	Obama put, gave Payton commuted her sentence, right?
	So it only makes sense that Biden would go ahead and push to get him sent back to Australia as well.
	Because remember, a lot of you guys forget, Joe Biden was Obama's vice president.
	A lot of you Gen Zers don't even remember, don't know, because you guys were probably babies back then.
	Biden was Obama's vice president, guys.
	And now Obama is pretty much like the vice president for Biden right now.
	He's pretty much the president, to be honest with you.
	He's very heavily involved in the Biden administration.
	But regardless, does that make sense, guys?
	So just too many things that don't make sense for the U.S. government to continue this prosecution and extradition process.
	It doesn't make sense.
	He served five years.
	Australian government wants him back.
	It's going to cost him a bunch of money and time.
	Fuck it.
	It doesn't look good.
	It's a black guy in the U.S. government, U.S. Department of Justice anyway, right?
	When you persecute people politically, Donald Trump, January 6thers, Julian Assange.
	It just makes the Department of Justice look bad.
	And they don't want any more bad press at this point.
	Government approval right now by the American public is at all time fucking low.
	There was a poll recently on this that the U.S. government, the U.S., The American people don't trust the U.S. government.
	It has some of the lowest approval ratings ever.
	So, fuck it, man.
	It's not worth it to them.
	Give me ones in the chat if y'all agree.
	Give me twos in the chat if you guys disagree.
	Give me threes in the chat if you guys enjoyed the show.
	I'm just kidding.
	I want to see what you guys think.
	But that's my general consensus.
	That's my summary, guys.
	Of why they let Assange go.
	And I think that's a big reason, too, why they went ahead, the Supreme Court went back on some of that case law for the January Sixers.
	I think the U.S. government's waking up and realizing that persecuting people politically is not the way to go.
	It makes you lose trust with the American public.
	And Trump proved that.
	Trump absolutely proved that.
	He got found guilty and he raised $100 million and getting more support than ever before.
	So they're seeing that.
	And I think the Washington case, the national defense, the Florida federal case, they pushed that back.
	And then the Washington, D.C. case, they pushed that one back too.
	So they're delaying it.
	So they're catching on that, like, yo, just indicting people politically is just not a good move.
	So that's why I think Julian Assange was released.
	That's why I think the January 6ers laws were kind of reversed from the Supreme Court perspective.
	And Donald Trump, you guys love him or hate him?
	Donald Trump absolutely set a precedent that political prosecution is not a wave.
	It is not a wave.
	Created a black eye for the U.S. Department of Justice and law enforcement and the prosecutorial offices in general.
	Martin, if we do go to war, where do you think we will put the boots on the ground first?
	Europe, theater, or Middle East?
	It'll be the Middle East, 100%.
	It'll be the Middle East.
	Cool.
	Guys, two hours on a dot.
	Hope you guys enjoyed today's episode of FedReacts.
	I know I did.
	I'll catch you guys tomorrow.
	We're going to have a three-peat.
	Like I said, we're going to have Jonathan Sharp and Tommy Sotomayer.
	We're going to have big things with one.
	We're going to have him talk on to talk about trucking, right?
	So for Monday Monday.
	And then we're going to have an after-hours for you guys.
	Love you news.
	Hope you guys enjoyed the show.
	Very informative.
	Time stamps are going to be up very soon.
	Like the video on YouTube, guys, if you haven't already, please.
	Right?
	We got hit with some stream suspended bullshit, which kind of is annoying, but you know, it is what it is.
	But I'll catch you guys on the next one.
	Peace.
	Our special agent with homelands investigations, okay, guys?
	HSI.
	This is what FedReacts covers.
	Defender Jeffrey Williams, an associate of YSL, did commit the felony.
	Here's what 6ix9ine actually got.
	I can charge the crib.

▲