 Day three of the resumption of drilling massages Extradition hearing took place at O'Barrell in London And I think the defense has gotten their star witness They're only the third day in and there's a long long list of witnesses over the next few weeks It'll be hard to see someone top what Trevor Tim did today on the virtual Witness stand speaking from California or online Testifying under oath to the courtroom in London Trevor Tim is the executive director of the freedom of press foundation He is also a trained lawyer. He actually passed the New York bar, which is not an easy thing to do and he Decide not to practice law but to get into a media law and press freedom And he deals with legal issues and writes about complex legal issues involving the press Tim went on the stand in the afternoon session and He in my view demolished a good part of the government's case Which is looking weaker and weaker and he shrunk. Mr. Lewis James Lewis the Prosecutor who bullied Mark Feldstein and journals and professor yesterday into submission Paul Rogers a professor from Bradford University Testified in the morning and he stood his ground But the afternoon Tim was as common as can be and he was a complete commander the facts And he left Lewis speechless really and and cornered him on to a very narrow argument What are the points that Trevor Tim made that were so important that are the key to the government's argument now that we've heard over the last Two days one that the government is not prosecuting Assange for publishing That's an appeal the public that they're not going after journalists To that the only documents they're actually prosecuting him for the ones in which he named Informants now government of Florence for the US. That's also publishing But beside the point The team made a strong strong argument on those two points. In fact, he he did what the Defense attorneys did yesterday, but in an even better way than the defense attorneys He went through the indictment and explained that there is it is not just about those documents That he is being charged with passively receiving Classified information and merely possessing it under the espionage act There's nothing to do with whether there were informants or not informants in those documents That's clearly in the indictment that Tim has studied. It looks like even better than James Lewis QC has He also says that even though he published the informants names Some of these documents that in his view and in the consensus He says a First Amendment advocates a media organization and media lawyers is not illegal Now I've been arguing and print and CN live broadcast that there's no law against Publishing the names of informants that there are laws to protect government agents like a CIA agent I think I mentioned last night Valerie Flanke's from the Bush administration years You can't uncover a covert agent clearly in the injury that person's lives and the lives of people that that agent has dealt with But there's no law no statute talking about revealing a name of a government informant Which is not a government agent in the same way that a CIA agent There's this no statute. It doesn't appear on the indictment but Tim went further than that on yesterday I should say Lewis explained why they think that's part of the espionage act because he claimed that the Government sees those informants names as defense information and broadly the espionage act was protecting defense information But Trevor Tim said that this was not a crime But that it might and as I've said earlier, it could be unethical, but it's not illegal Made that point very strongly that it could be wrong, but it's not against the law That the Supreme Court has upheld in the United States very unsavory speech Even threatening speech so you can Take from what Tim has said that the government has lost if Vanessa Barreza the Gonna make this decision If she's paying attention She has an open mind She has seen today that that main argument that they've tried to narrow down to about the Informants being the only thing that they're charging them with no other documents is a false because the indictment covers all Classified material from 2010 and 2011 including those that he passed And to that the naming the informants while I might be unethical and wrong Was not a crime This is what the government will have to prove somehow to first Vanessa Barreza And I think if she listens to Tim she will see that there's not a crime Even if it's unethical didn't even get into the whole issue of the Guardian and released The doctor the password they were the ones who didn't care about having a redacted That's all beside the point here. Even if Assange did willfully even if he said at that dinner Yeah, the informants deserve to die That's not illegal. It might be despicable thing to say and we know that a German journalist who was there who will testify next week Says he never said that but let's assume he did that's not a crime It goes all back to who Assange is and who has been how he's been portrayed by the media is this awful human being and You know what if they arrested every awful human being out there There would be hardly anybody walking on the streets and you got to do more than that. You got to break a law But Tim went on beyond that He argued that the government Cannot determine who or not as a journalist, you know, this is one thing Lewis said He said that the government is says that Assange is not a journalist, but he's not afforded the same protections Tim Responded Trevor Tim that that's irrelevant whether he government thinks he's a journalist or any money else He engaged in activity that is what journalistic activity engaged in journalistic Activity and that is the key point here that what's described in the indictment is what journalists do all the time They encourage could Joel ask their sources for more information even get breaking the law to get classified information He said at one point Tim that if this indictment ever went through and if sons was ever convicted that somebody like Woodward and Bernstein and many many Hundreds of investigative journalists including Bob Perry the founders can sort of news would have been arrested and in future Could be arrested because all they're doing is engaging in journalistic practices and that's what the indictment And it was clear when you read it But that's what the indictment is describing and the people who wrote it don't seem to understand what journalists do what they're trying to say Assange is not a journalist and I thought Tim answered back Lewis very well by saying it's irrelevant And certainly the government doesn't have the right to determine who a journalist is he engaged in journalistic activities That's enough Tim also took on this wish list when we were in London in February for that first week They made a big deal about the wish list This was supposedly a fishing expedition by Assange to get people to Give him classified information put out there what he wanted Anybody could please give us these documents And that somehow is a crime as Tim said they made this into something nefarious and As on the direct examination was pointed out that Tim had at the time of the torture report When it came out and even before the executive summary was declassified with redactions Tim had put out a tweet asking any brave soul out there who has access to this torture report inside the government at the CIA presumably or in Congress at the Senate intelligence committee to leak it to various media organizations and Many reporters did the same so the argument there is he's committed the same crime that Assange is alleged to have committed a weekly state by putting out a wish list He's journalists will ask Somebody to leak something now The other thing is that the wish list itself. He pointed out was not even created only by Weekie leaks that it was a wiki. It was many people who had contributed to making that list So it wasn't even just a weekly leaks a project He also pointed out as Lewis tried to say that Assange You know Participated in a hacking of a government computer Tim who have read the indictment pointed out to him that that's not what the indictment says that the indictment says that by helping Chelsea to crack that password that she was going to be hiding her identity make it more difficult for investigators to identify Who was doing that? That is what the indictment says Now they didn't even get into at that point Tim didn't mention two things about that One that At the indictment clearly labels and lists all the access and top-secret clearance that Chelsea Manning had at the time She had all of the clearances she needed to get the document Number two that attempt to crack that first word failed so she never they never got documents She didn't steal it. It would be at best an attempted theft and then I hope we hear this again because I I don't know I heard it in February I was in the courtroom and we heard The lawyers for Assange saying that is she that Assange was trying to help Chelsea crack that password So she could download these movie music videos and video games to give to American soldiers who are not allowed to have them When they're on active duty, so I mean that just blew that out of the water We haven't heard that mention yet, but Tim took care of that by saying that That it was really about hiding the identity not stealing the documents, which is what Lewis was trying to say Now In the dropboxes was another issue that Trevor Tim dealt with in today's testimony He was saying that again the government makes us look like some kind of various thing that there's a secret way for people to fulfill this wish list And and and to ask and to respond to a request from leaks for documents, which is protected journalistic activity By sending him to the anonymous dropbox which we colleagues pioneered, but This company this serve this nonprofit the freedom of press foundation that Tim is executive director of as he said testimony they took six years to develop a Dropbox that is used by over 60 major media organizations including the New York Times the Wall Street Journal the Guardian the Washington Post So they're all doing the same thing we colleagues did and that was a constant thing of Tim under direct examination when he was explaining that the behavior is Outlined in the indictment is what a journalist does and that's why it's so dangerous that journalism will be criminalized if this case Goes ahead. I have to say I Have some kind of grudging respect for James Lewis. I mean he is a good prosecutor. He's a bully. He's interrogating he's Nasty, he's looking for a chink in an armor. He's doing what a prosecutor is supposed to do. I guess it's not pleasant to watch But he was a shrunken man today in my view whether the way Tim calmly Battered away everything he was saying and left him speeches You would have thought that Lewis would have interrupted him But he let him go on and on because I don't think he believed what he was hearing a man who knew what he was talking about And he was basically reduced to the same question. He was asking yesterday. I fell down I believe this morning with Paul Rogers the university professor about Whether this is a politically motivated crime or not Prosecution rather reduced to trying to undermine the credibility of these witnesses saying they're not expert witnesses They're only giving opinion. Why are they not experts because under British regulations? There are certain requirements that are necessary to fulfill in order to become an expert witness in the one He's zeroing in on is that you have to Prove or demonstrate that you are impartial and objective because Felstein yesterday Rogers this morning and Tim this afternoon in this written testimony to the court did not print Did not mention this memo from uh, this statements from Gordon Cumberg who is the Prosecutor in Alexandria of Virginia or actually I actually met when I went to the court the day that a reporter's group was trying to get the a copy of the indictment if you recall it was Mistakenly published at one point and the government denied there was ever an indictment. That's a son but of course there was the line uh, so there was a court case and and That judge uh, who who's going to perhaps leona brink about was going to probably try a son if he should be sent to the united states Cumberg was there and I spoke with him briefly So I I didn't remember his name, but he kept coming up and now It turns out he made the statement saying that we are not prosecuting a son for political reasons But purely on a criminal law So why wasn't that in the statement of tim and rogers and And and uh, felstein. Well, you know, uh, I think Tim explained that in general terms He's dealing with those issues and he had a brilliant response He doesn't rely on government press releases But to study his own study of the indictment That's what he was reduced to lewis saying. Why didn't you put that government pressure recently just because the government said we are not doing a political Trial then we have to believe them now This brings me to rogers actually because that was a big part of that Rogers basically was saying that he was not impugning the reputation of professionals in the department of justice Who were probably doing their best to do what they think was right But that was the senior higher level officials who pressured them or gave them orders To prosecute sange. This is where their political motivation is found not at the lower level department of justice prosecutors and lawyers and And of course to back that up to prove that are the statements by trump against the press Against sange and specifically what jeff session said with uh, pump payo said with his speech about hostile non-state intelligence agency and bill bar They all and unfortunately, but joe biden too by the way But they all said they wanted to get this guy and that that didn't exist in the obama administration But they did not Prosecute and again, we went over and over again the semantics of whether there was a decision or not a decision Why was it left open? This is what louis has for his argument that the case was never dropped And rogers said he agrees with that but what's not understood is the intensity of the investigation So yes, the obama administration Did not close the grand jury, but they did not indict sange. So that is a fact they did did they decide Not to or they you know, they kept the Grand jury open and it could be because they thought new evidence would come or they wanted a open spirited To go after but essentially it was dormant. It seems nobody knows how intense that grand jury was it was just left open He tried to louis tried to impugn Tim's reputation by saying he was a conflict of interest because the freedom of press foundation has made a donation of a hundred thousand dollars To the defense fund of julian sange But tim said that this is what they do. They support journalists Who are unbeing unfairly attacked? So he didn't see a conflict of interest there whatsoever um Again gordon as louis tried to say that you know tried to pin on a sange One of these a crime that a journalist is not above the law that was established Everybody agrees with that and that if a journalist and there was an instance three examples given if he stole evidence from a crime scene Or if he wire tapped someone illegally Or if he literally broke in and stole and stole a document that these were crimes that a journalist could not be excused for But uh, I think tim did a very convincing job of showing that that is not exactly what julian sange did So we are looking forward. Unfortunately tomorrow is not daniel elsberg, but I really want hope you can see that testify uh, we have someone named eric louis and uh, we don't know much about him, but we're going to talk to you about him tomorrow But on the whole it was a good day. I think for the defense Because particularly tim's testimony and even rogers in the morning stood up to louis his bullying tactics Uh, and and at the end of the day today, there was a big argument about the time limits being put The the prosecution has been given an hour to cross examine and the defense only has a half an hour with their witness and louis was saying he didn't want any restrictions that he'd never experienced such a thing whatsoever and Vanessa varice and we were privy to listen into that as we watched The video link normally in an american court They would be called to the bench and have a private conversation or even go to the judge's chamber This was all right out in the open. It's not all that interesting was housekeeping But looks like we're going to start again at That 10 a.m. British time that's 5 a.m. And the east coast of the u.s uh with day four And if anything if day four goes anything like day three The defense should be feeling pretty good about themselves But again, it's ultimately up to whether venice abracer has an open mind here She seemed quite more engaged today than what she was yesterday and tim was such a Brilliant witness and the way he spoke that it was hard not to understand what he was talking about About how the sange is a journalist. He was acting as a journalist And he did not steal any documents with jelsie manning And that's our report for tonight Day three is over in the books Tomorrow, we'll see you at the same time That's 5 p.m. British time And 12 noon in us east coast So for cn live This is joe loria and i ask you to go to our patreon page, please and become a patron of cn live to keep this weekly show going now during the A sange ring and particularly this nightly report So good evening and speak to you tomorrow You