 So, believe it or not, I actually have some surprisingly good news. The United States government's case against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, the extradition case against him, it has failed. A British judge has turned it down, and the reasoning for turning this down is really interesting to me. It tells us a little bit about how the world sees us, but let me just say before we get to the specifics that this is a win for the First Amendment. I mean, this isn't final news. Of course, the United States government will appeal this decision. But for now, this is really important because the precedent that this would set if the US government was successful in extraditing him and then prosecuting him subsequently, it would be a disaster for journalism in the United States and the First Amendment. So the fact that this attempt has failed, we should all breathe a little bit easier for now, knowing that Julian Assange will not be extradited to the United States for prosecution. But having said that, though, let's get to the specifics of the case. As Ben Quinn of The Guardian reports, Julian Assange will make a fresh bid to be released from prison on Wednesday after a British judge ruled that he cannot be extradited to the US to face charges of espionage and of hacking government computers. Lawyers for US authorities are appealing against the ruling at the Old Bailey, which rejected arguments that the WikiLeaks co-founder would not get a fair trial in the United States, but blocked extradition on the basis that procedures in prisons there would not prevent him from potentially taking his own life. Assange will appear on Wednesday at Westminster Magistrates Court in West London for a new bail application, where his legal team is expected to refer to conditions at Belmarsh High Security Prison in South London against the backdrop of the worsening COVID-19 pandemic. Legal experts say they would be surprised if bail is granted given Assange's categorization as a flight risk. Wearing a mask and a navy suit, the 49-year-old listened on Monday from the dock at the Central Criminal Court of England and Wales as the district judge, Vanessa Beretser, initially knocked down arguments by his lawyers one after another and accepted the US authorities assertion that his alleged activities fell outside of the realm of journalism. But turning to evidence by medical experts about Assange's precarious mental health, she said the overall impression is of a depressed and sometimes despairing man who is genuinely fearful about his future. I find that the mental condition of Mr. Assange is such that it would be oppressive to extradite him to the United States of America, she concluded. So this is interesting to me. It's still a victory and I'll take one where we can get it, but not a victory on the grounds that I had hoped for. Basically, he isn't getting extradited because the US prison system is inadequate, because our system is worse than Britain, worse than the rest of the world. He's not winning this case on grounds that he actually is protected by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. He is winning this case because we're terrible. So that to me is interesting, very interesting. So in other words, if the US prison system was better and could actually offer protection for Julian Assange, then he could have very well have been prosecuted under the Espionage Act, because the allegation from the US government is that it's not just that WikiLeaks published Chelsea Manning's leaks, but that they helped her hack into US encrypted computers and actually get that information. They were part of this campaign. It was Espionage. They took the information. They didn't just publish it. Now it's interesting because I haven't heard this argument until they tried to extradite him, because the case against Julian Assange and Chelsea Manning, it has always been, well, you know, you can't publish information about the US government and evidence of our war crimes, because this it hurts us when it comes to national security, whatever, they, you know, pull the national security card whenever it's convenient. But now they're saying, no, actually, Julian Assange, you hacked into our computers. You didn't just publish hacked information. So it's, it's really interesting that this case ended up being determined because the US prison system is so cruel because when it comes to the substance in the event they were able to prosecute Julian Assange under the Espionage Act, the precedent that this would set would have been horrific because any other journalist who wants to publish classified information, now that this is precedent, if it were precedent, they could just think, maybe I'll be better off just not publishing this because I could be prosecuted. The government can say that I'm a co-conspirator. I'm not just the publisher. I'm actually helping them acquire this information. They can make that argument and the government can use that against me. So I don't want to publish this and that's bad. It's not just bad for journalism. It's bad because this is accountability, right? The media is supposed to be basically the fourth branch of government unofficially, where they hold government accountable. And as shitty as our media is, they still have to have the capability to be able to publish information about our government that the government does not want getting out, war crimes being one of them. So if you can't do that and you're going to worry about retaliation from the US government by publishing dirt on them, that's bad. And this is what that could have potentially produced. And it's not over because the appeal is coming. I don't know if the United States government can say, well, we have a special, you know, facility will send him to where he'll be protected. I don't know. I don't think it's over yet, but I'm glad we got this victory, but it's just scary that we were this close to basically really taking a sledgehammer to the First Amendment. And it's sad that people don't realize what was at stake in this case. Like people hate Julian Assange because of the 2016 Russia stuff. But this is not about that. This is about the Chelsea Manning Leagues that proved our government is doing war crimes in Iraq. And Afghanistan and nobody thinks about the long term repercussions of this case. They just kind of have this political hatred of Julian Assange. But this isn't about Julian Assange. This is about the broader precedent that this case would set. Like you have to remove him from the situation. So, you know, it's a it's very interesting, very, very interesting that this is ultimately how this case ended for now. But nonetheless, I'm happy about it. And this is a victory. And I'm going to celebrate this victory because had he been extradited to the United States and prosecuted that would have been a new low for the United States. It would have been an attack on the First Amendment unlike anything we've seen before.