 you've mentioned the deep state that Trump wasn't particularly fond of. So at one point he had taken on the CIA and Chuck Schumer told him that that was not a wise thing to do because they have six ways till Sunday to get back at you. Now Joe Laurier and I were present in the extradition hearing the whole month of it. What we learned there are two things very important things about the CIA intelligence agencies the American friends as they were called is that UC Global were spying on Julian Assange in the embassy on his lawyers doctors and all visitors on behalf of the American friends. We also learned from an expert witness Maureen Baird she was somebody who had been responsible for administering SAMS special administrative measures and what was revealed was that the intelligence agencies and specifically the CIA also weighed in on whether a particular prisoner should get SAMS. So this is a stitch up if ever when they are gathering the evidence and spying on the defense but also responsible in a large way for dealing out the punishment of being silenced for the rest of his life. Don't you think that that's another reason why President Trump would want to stick it to them? Well I say that by doing this it would be giving a poke in the eye to the deep state so yeah we can say it would be sticking it to him but look the things that you've outlined there are just absolutely outrageous. I don't know how any court could extradite someone knowing that all of their personal legal communications had been spied upon by the side that wants to extradite him that is a clear signal that there would not be a fair trial because there is this rule of law in the UK a rule of law supposedly in the US supposedly in the UK that those conversations are privileged not to be spied on yet they were so how on earth can anyone have a fair trial? The Commonwealth director of public prosecutions stated that it was not in the public interest to prosecute a journalist for reporting on war crimes that in the case of Dan Oakes an ABC journalist it seems to me that if the Australian federal police did drop the charges against the ABC journalist and he was doing something very similar to Julian Assange he was reporting on war crimes in Afghanistan and using classified information so how can we still be so indifferent to Julian and just let it happen to him? You've just outlined a clear argument that if Julian Assange ever comes back to Australia and there is an extradition case in Australia which is possible the exact reason legally why he should not be extradited director of public prosecutions Commonwealth director of public prosecutions no less that is a serious sort of a role where you make these deliberations based on facts of law and what's in the public interest and that director of public prosecution speaks for the Commonwealth of Australia that view would mean that if Britain was following the same sort of legal philosophy that the Australian Commonwealth follows that you would not be extraditing that person you would not be extraditing Julian Assange.