Here's the News: Fair Trial For Assange? Think Again! Judge’s Links To M16 Exposed
As it’s discovered that the judge set to rule on the Assange extradition case was previously paid to represent the interests of MI6 and the Ministry of Defence - whose activities WikiLeaks has exposed – what are the chances of a fair hearing for Julian Assange? --💙Support this channel directly here: https://bit.ly/RussellBrand-SupportWATCH me LIVE weekdays on Rumble: https://bit.ly/russellbrand-rumbleVisit the new merch store: https://bit.ly/Stay-Free-StoreFollow on social media:X: @rustyrocketsINSTAGRAM: @russellbrandFACEBOOK: @russellbrand
Hello there you Awakening Wonders on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you download your podcasts.
We really appreciate you, our listeners, and want to bring you more content.
We will be delivering a podcast every day, seven days a week, every single day.
You'll get a detailed breakdown of current topics that the mainstream media should be covering, but if they are covering, they're amplifying establishment messages and not telling you the truth.
Once a week we bring you in-depth conversations with guests like Jordan Peterson, RFK Jr, Sam Harris, Vandana Shiva, Gabor Mate and many more.
Now enjoy this episode of Stay Free with Russell Brand.
Remember, there's an episode every single day to educate and elevate our consciousness together.
Stay free and enjoy the episode.
No, here's the fucking news!
Hello there you Awakening Wonders, thanks for joining us on our voyage to truth and freedom.
A voyage I pray that Julian Assange will be joining us on.
If you want to support our content, click the link in the description.
We make additional content every week for our supporters and we are committed to opposing the establishment at this pivotal time.
You feel it's pivotal?
It is pivotal!
Indeed, everything around us demonstrates that we are at a crucial moment.
Even the current hearing that Julian Assange is having to fight for the right to have an appeal against his extradition.
Look at the layers before Julian Assange will get anything approaching justice.
He's currently, as you know I'm sure, in Belmarsh without trial and one of the two judges that will be hearing the case previously represented MI6 and the Ministry of Defence Who was both exposed by WikiLeaks that Julian Assange obviously set up.
So what are the chances of Julian Assange getting a fair trial when one of the judges has explicit connections to organisations negatively affected by WikiLeaks?
If you continue to disrupt the court in this way, I will have to cite you for contempt.
You wouldn't dare!
Well, no, I guess I wouldn't.
Just to give you a sort of broad open take, Julian Assange is a key pivotal anti-establishment figure.
The establishment literally is an immersive entity.
To get any kind of fair trial, Julian Assange shouldn't be having this hearing in the UK or the US or the anglophonic world.
He'd have to go to somewhere like Ecuador or Peru or Switzerland or Iceland or something because the establishment by its nature controls institutions.
That's part of what Julian Assange exposed.
Justice and our values and principles as conveyed to us through the legacy media is a kind of veil, a kind of insidious fog that masks reality and distracts us from deeper truths.
Julian Assange did incredible work in revealing to us the nature of hypocrisy and corruption when it comes to foreign wars, when it comes to corporate corruption and now Julian Assange is having a hearing The hearing is being presided over by, of course, a member of the establishment.
Let's have a look at the difficulties that Julian Assange faces and the ridiculousness of a hearing being presided over by an establishment figure that's been personally affected almost at every turn, whose career is almost defined by not liking Julian Assange, being the person that presides over the case.
One of the two High Court judges who will rule on Julian Assange's bid to stop his extradition to the US represented the UK's Secret Intelligence Service, MI6, and the Ministry of Defence.
Now, by the time you're watching this, the hearing may have already concluded that Julian Assange doesn't have the right to appeal, or by some miracle, that he does have the right to appeal, because I can turn these things around.
Really quickly, but they more likely will take an incredible amount of time to take all the air out of it What I'd like you to pay attention to is the astonishing goal of the establishment that doesn't conceal that Judge Jeremy Johnson and Dame Victoria Sharpe at almost every turn have connections to the very kind of incidents and stories that WikiLeaks and Assange in particular revealed Their hubris is so complete that they can sort of publicly declare that they've represented MI6, they've represented the police, they've represented the government, they have special clearance.
And in a way what this shows you is the nature of the establishment.
Not only is the establishment by its nature corrupt and self-preserving, but also it doesn't really fear that you have any power to impede it, interrupt it, or even challenge it.
Otherwise they would surely keep the kind of things we're about to reveal secret.
This is astonishing.
Just this Jeremy Johnson, which is a silly name, has also been a specially vetted barrister cleared by the UK authorities to access top secret information.
When people talk about systemic corruption, I suppose what's in fact being discussed is the impossibility of challenging certain structures and certain systems.
That they're so congealed and concealed and controlled that even to penetrate them is a ridiculous and almost inconceivable task.
If you have that kind of special clearance, if you've been to those schools and universities, if you've represented MI6 and the Ministry of Defence, how will you impartially view a figure like Julian Assange, who has, at every turn, challenged establishment authority, exposed corruption in war, exposed war crimes?
He's not going to be able to go, no, thinking about this, we've actually been wrong.
This is a figure that's emerging from the establishment to evaluate the interests of the establishment.
What's being revealed by the Assange case is the intractability of the establishment and the impossibility of true justice within it.
Johnson will sit with Dame Victoria Sharp.
Terrifying name!
And now, the compassionate, the friendly, the lovable, Dame Victoria Sharp!
Oh no!
Get Justice Jeremy Johnson back!
I fucking hate you and all!
His senior judge to decide the fate of the WikiLeaks co-founder.
If extradited, Assange faces a maximum sentence of 175 years, which you'd have to become a tortoise to serve.
People don't live that long.
His persecution by the US authorities has been at the behest of Washington's intelligence and security services, with whom the UK has deep relations.
Some of their deep relations, as Edward Snowden revealed, is the sharing of private data between Five Eyes countries that includes the UK and US, Which is sort of illegal, certainly against the principles of justice and clarity and transparency that they espouse.
How is the exposure of crime being treated as criminality?
Assange's journalistic career has been marked by exposing the dirty secrets of the US and UK national security establishments.
He now faces a judge who has acted for and received security clearance from some of those state agencies.
As with previous judges who have ruled on Assange's case, this raises concerns about institutional conflicts of interest.
They're not conflicts of interest, it's the mechanic of the system.
As they say, it's not a bug, it's a feature.
How can he ever be the recipient of justice?
When the system itself functions in order to prevent that, it would mean the system breaking apart.
It's comparable to so many arguments.
If you wanted to repay the true cost of imperialism, you'd have to dismantle the royal family, the nation.
It's one of those issues that shows you the problem with the institutions themselves.
That's why we are fascinated with this case, because you can't have justice for Julian Assange without a true reckoning for the deep state.
Corporate corruption.
The military-industrial complex.
And you know, of course, because you watch our channel, that these are the problems that define our age.
These are the problems that, since the various forms of incarceration of Julian Assange, have become more and more prevalent.
Think how often we're talking about censorship.
Think how vigorously the pursuit of censorship is defining our age right now.
Hate speech laws in Ireland.
The laws that have been passed in Canada.
The online safety bill in this country, which of course is presented to us.
We're just Trying to protect children.
How are you going to protect children?
By controlling the information you have access to.
What Julian Assange did is he punctured that facade, gave us a bunch of information so we could decide for ourselves whether or not we wanted to support foreign wars.
Many people concluded that they didn't want to support foreign wars and Julian Assange went to jail for a very long time.
Exactly how much Johnson has been paid for his work for government departments is not clear.
Records show he was paid twice by the government legal department for his services in 2018.
The sum was over £55,000.
Imagine if this was to do with Donald Trump and Donald Trump was being adjudicated over by someone that previously worked for him.
Legacy Media would be outraged.
Think already of what's being revealed to you just by this story.
The BBC aren't starting going, the judge in the Julian Assange case has already previously sort of acted against Julian Assange.
You won't see that on the BBC.
You might see in some of their 24-hour coverage a few shots of outside their Royal Courts of Justice.
You might here a pundit saying that Australia are now supporting his
release.
What you will not be able to see is how this case demonstrates the nature of intrinsic corruption
between media, the state, corporations, because that would challenge the system itself.
That's why Julian Assange is important.
What he did was brought us to a point where we had to re-evaluate the nature of these systems in themselves.
Recognise, oh no, these systems are totally corrupt.
And you all feel that now.
That's what this new movement is about.
It's about recognising these institutions are unreliable, whether it's the media, the judiciary, or parliamentary or congressional politics.
There's such a requirement for reckoning that a hearing like this can only really be theatre.
Justice Johnson became a deputy High Court judge in 2016 and a full judge in 2019.
His biography states he has been often acting in cases involving the police and government department.
And now, a word from our sponsors.
Look at this glorious apple.
Why, it's like the fruit of Eden.
Indeed, it is the fruit of Eden.
You can see why Snow White would be tempted by this glorious piece of fruit.
On the other hand, the lonely banana decaying slowly, rotting before our eyes.
The reason for that is Apple Stem Cells, a technology that was utilized by Swiss scientists in a glorious experiment that showed that Apple Stem Cells are effective in improving human beauty.
Now, our sponsor today, Charlize, uses a toner that deploys Apple Stem Cells to rejuvenate your skin.
In much the same... I mean, that's just actually glorious.
I feel better already.
Not only does it make your skin feel better, it's boosting me with serotonin.
If I was a little less responsible, I'd be drinking this because you could drink it, you shouldn't drink it, but you could drink it because it's completely toxic-free.
It fights the signs of aging using these apple stem cells.
Just one spray, it blasts your whole face.
You'll look and feel magnificent.
Me and my wife are using this together.
Our marriage is improving.
Yes, our skin's looking great.
I hope you'll agree.
And the serotonin is sending us through the roof.
Many of Charlize's products smell beautiful.
They're all natural.
They're completely toxic free.
The orange citrus essence perfume is fantastic.
There's a link in the description that will allow you to get 25% off by going to charlize.beauty and using the promo code brand.
It's a simple choice really.
This glorious apple or this droopy old soppy banana.
That's charlize.beauty promo code brand.
Me and the family are using it.
And we've nary felt better.
Let's get back to the story.
As a barrister in 2007, he represented MI6 as an observer during the inquest into the deaths of Princess Diana and Dodi Al-Fayed.
Okay!
Nothing to see here!
Johnson worked alongside Robin Tam QC, previously described by legal directories as a barrister who does an enormous amount of often sensitive work for the UK government.
Why is the work sensitive?
If you think about it, what your government's supposed to be is, you pay for them out of your taxes, you vote for them as your democratic right, and then they've got all this sensitive information that you're not allowed access to, presumably to protect you, that's what's declared in order to protect you, but I think we're all starting to realise that it's in order to control you.
What is sensitive is, If everyone knew this information, we'd have mass disobedience on our hands, so you better control that information.
And if anyone ever exposes it, do what you have to do to stop them and put them behind bars.
Say what you have to say.
At the time, Foreign Office sources could not recall a previous occasion when MI6 had appointed lawyers to an inquest.
Hmm.
MI6 was reportedly so concerned by possible revelations during the inquest that Johnson was appointed to sit in on the hearing.
Presumably what those concerns were from MI6 was that we'd be so excited and so happy about the revelations in that inquest of the death of Diana and Dodi that we'd all just go crazy in celebrating our love for the nation, that we'd just like, let's give these people more power, let's give them more ability to censor us.
That inquest and those concerns were about a surprise party for your birthday and you've ruined it!
He reportedly received a brief from MI6 in advance of the inquest and was tasked with providing such assistance as the coroner may require.
The coroner?
Why is the coroner gonna require assistance from a lawyer?
This is a bit weird, isn't it?
Why is a coroner whose job is to look at dead bodies and go, what the cause of death is?
I think we'll end that sentence here.
The cause of death is whatever MI6 say cause of death is.
Oh!
Yes, that's right, there was a lot of flashes in the tunnel, it's all confusing.
Oh look, another royal wedding!
Johnson has also represented the UK Ministry of Defence on at least two occasions.
I mean, if ever there was anyone that's going to have a grudge against Julian Assange, it's the person who's represented the Ministry of Defence and MO6.
It also says here, in 1996, you lost to Julian Assange in a fun run.
Yes, I'm still pretty pissed off about that.
In 2013, he acted for the department during the high-profile Al-Suaidi inquiry, which looked into allegations that British soldiers torture and unlawfully killed Iraqi prisoners in 2004.
The MOD's lawyers said the Iraqi allegations were a product of lies and that those making the claims were guilty of criminal conspiracy.
Well, many of the WikiLeaks revelations included improper conduct by military personnel, the illegal bombing of territories in the Middle East, torture and unusual practices by service personnel.
I mean, we can get into the morality of individual soldiers when they are wearing their fatigues and charged by their nation.
That's an interesting thing.
But institutional corruption and the concealment of that is a very interesting subject.
And right in the wheelhouse of Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, Judge Jeremy Johnson literally defended those allegations.
You couldn't have someone that has more vested interests.
Jeremy Johnson literally has a long history of defending the establishment from the type of revelations that WikiLeaks made.
It's ridiculous that you would appoint someone with so many intrinsic connections to Julian Assange and these types of stories, unless what you wanted was for the appeal process to falter and be halted.
Johnson argued there was compelling and extensive independent forensic evidence to refute the case.
The five-year inquiry, which cost around 25 million pounds, which you paid for, exonerated the British troops.
Johnson was appointed by the Attorney General to be a special advocate in around 2007, declassified understands.
These are specially vetted barristers who act for the purpose of hearing secret evidence in a closed court.
Special advocates must undergo and obtain developed vetting, the highest level of HM government security clearance prior to their appointment, government guidance state.
The more you learn about Justice Jeremy Johnson, the more he begins to sound a bit like Pulp Fiction's Winston Wolfe.
I'm Winston Wolfe.
I solve problems.
This is the person you call in when the establishment has a problem with a dissident, or when the establishment is about to be exposed as being incredibly corrupt.
Uh-oh!
Get Judge Jeremy Johnson in.
He's had the highest level of special clearance.
This is the establishment boy.
If we don't call on him now, we're in serious trouble.
That's the person that will be sitting and going, hmm Julian Assange, should we just Let him loose and send a message to other independent journalists that you're free to analyse establishment activity and corruption and the influence of corporations over the government and the activities of the deep state and the level of spying on ordinary citizens and the exploitation of military personnel that drives them to commit crimes on behalf of their nation.
Should we let this guy free or what?
Or should we put him in prison for 175 years and send a clear message to anyone who's thinking of attacking the establishment that this is what happens to you.
Keep.
Your.
Mouth.
Shut.
Whether you're a citizen, or a journalist, or an activist, or whoever you are.
We got a machine, we got tools to silence and control you.
I wonder how this hearing's gonna go?
Developed vetting is required for individuals having frequent and uncontrolled access to top-secret assets or require any access to top-secret codeword material.
In 2016, Johnson acted as a special advocate in the case of Abdel Hakim Belhage, a Libyan national who accused the UK government and MI6 of participating in kidnapping him and his pregnant wife Fatima Bouchard.
The UK government later apologized for its actions that contributed to Belhage and Bouchard's rendition, detention and torture.
We'd like to apologise for kidnapping you and torturing you and your pregnant wife as well.
And I hope you'll accept this apology on behalf of the establishment and hopefully add an end to the matter.
No need.
We don't bear grudges.
Julian Assange has been doing some journalism.
Put him in prison for longer than a person can live for!
WikiLeaks has published sensitive documents on the US and Britain's use of extraordinary rendition during the War on Terror.
So once again, exactly the type of things that WikiLeaks exposed.
It's ridiculous, you couldn't have someone more likely to view this from a pejorative and prejudiced perspective.
It's like having Jackie Onassis adjudicate on the trial of Lee Harvey Oswald.
Well actually, thinking about it, maybe the CIA- SHUT UP!
The lead judge in Assange's extradition case at the High Court is Dame Victoria Sharpe, the president of the King's Bench division, who was appointed in 2019 by then Prime Minister Theresa May.
Declassified has shown that Sharpe has family links to the Conservative Party.
I mean, of course, what is the establishment?
It's not going to be that you have High Court judges and politicians at all.
Alright, I didn't know you did that.
This is the establishment.
What we are discussing is establishment corruption and the impossibility of exposing that corruption and the consequences if you do.
Sharp and Johnson have adjudicated on other high-profile legal cases.
In 2022, they dismissed a claim for judicial review regarding bulk data collection and sharing by GCHQ, MI5 and MI6.
Another literal WikiLeaks case!
These are the people that have sort of most To lose!
That's very similar to Edward Snowden's revelations about NSA data capturing the Five Eyes Nation, sharing and bulk capturing our information, storing it to use at a later date should you ever become a dissident or enemy of the state.
To have people with such strong affiliations and affinity preside over this case is ridiculous.
It's beyond a kangaroo court.
It's an absolute mockery.
It's like having Darth Vader and Voldemort presiding over a case that involved Harry Potter and Luke Skywalker stealing lightsabers.
UK approval for Assange's extradition to the US, which flows from Washington's attempt to punish and silence Assange, has been given by successive Home Secretaries.
Johnson represented the Home Office in 2012 in a case relating to an asylum claim by an immigrant who had previously been subject to torture in Angola.
The Home Secretary at this time was Theresa May, who as Prime Minister would authorise the operation to seize Assange from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London in 2019.
He also has ties to Theresa May.
In a sense, what's being tried here is the system itself.
And the system can't find the system itself not guilty.
It'll be like some kind of reverse Skynet, where it'd have to go, hold on a minute, everything we've been doing for the last 20 years is totally corrupt.
We're going to have to stop it.
Now, because this decision may already have been made, you might be watching this and already know that Assange has been denied the right to appeal.
Or perhaps by some miracle, he's been granted the right to an appeal.
But that would lead me to conclude that that will be the point in which the appeal leads to.
Oh yeah, we are going to extradite him.
Because what the case shows is that what poses for government is essentially a kind of theatre that masks Corruption.
What poses for media is essentially a propaganda messaging system that amplifies the interests of the powerful.
What poses as a deep state that's meant to protect our interests and save us from the threat of extraterrestrial or at least international malice is at least in significant part a deep state apparatus for the control of the domestic population.
How can a hearing Ultimately say Julian Assange is really just a journalist and a hero.
He hasn't had a trial.
It's ridiculous that we'd extradite him.
Let him go back to Australia or to some neutral territory where he can live out the rest of his life and carry on with his good work exposing corruption.
Because it wouldn't just be releasing Assange, it would be recognizing the depth of its own corruption.
And how can it do that without dismantling itself live in those courts?
Johnson has also acted for the Metropolitan Police in a number of controversial cases regarding political policing and alleged illegal surveillance.
The Met would go on to lead Operation Pelican, the secret scheme to seize Assange from his asylum in the Ecuadorian embassy.
I went to visit Julian Assange when he was in that embassy, which in itself was a peculiar concoction.
The idea that that was a space in which he was free from the clutches of apparent justice and imperialist interests.
What's peculiar about all of this is that at every point where you assess the career of Justice Jeremy Johnson and to a degree Dame Victoria Sharpe, you see, and what else would you see, attachment and affinity with establishment interests.
How could it be otherwise?
They are in attendance by virtue of the fact that they are part of the establishment.
They are complicit in the events and actions that have led to Julian Assange being in this position.
So how can they objectively assess a situation that they either tangentially or directly created?
Johnson also represented West Midlands Police in the inquest over the Healesborough football stadium disaster and the 1974 Birmingham pub bombings.
The latter resulted in six men being wrongfully jailed for killing 21 people by a bomb planted by the IRA.
The Hillsborough football disaster and the jailing of the Birmingham Six in British cultural history represent two of the great stains on the establishment.
The wrongful arrest, conviction and imprisonment of innocent people for the crime of being From Ireland and the denial and accusation of wrongdoing of people for the crime of being football fans.
In a way, what this case reveals is the establishment is an edifice which protects the powerful from ordinary people like us.
And you might say, well, you've got that leather jacket on and you're famous.
Well, believe me, I'm on your side of the line.
We are all on that side of the line.
There are a set of interests that will be protected at all costs.
Julian Assange's crime was to expose those interests.
The idea that a nation like ours or a nation like the United States could give a fair hearing to a candidate, a character like Julian Assange, is ridiculous because it would represent the unraveling of their entire raison d'etre.
It would represent a kind of mea culpa of such magnitude that the day after that hearing you'd have to say, well we're gonna have to be honest, Elections don't work either.
We're gonna have to be honest, our entire parliamentary system is a sham.
We're gonna have to be honest, the ascent of globalism has meant that ordinary people don't have any real power in their own countries.
And the only power you do have, actually, is the power to comply.
And if you don't comply, then you will be in serious trouble.
And the crime that Julian Assange committed was the crime of non-compliance.
And that's why he's in Belmarsh.
That's why he's having this hearing.
That's why it's likely this hearing will fail.
That's why it's likely he'll be extradited.
And that's why it's likely that unless we do something about it, which means unprecedented non-compliance, Julian Assange will be punished, not for a crime, but for exposing crime.
And that is what's truly criminal.
But that's just what I think!
If you enjoy our content, then support us.
We make additional videos for our supporters every single week, as well as interviewing important journalists and giving you the chance to pose your questions to them.
