BC LEGAL
Saved by @CodyyyGardner

We're moments away from British judge announcing extradition decision in WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's case. I'll have live updates shortly.

 In their closing argument, Assange's legal team outlined how they believed the case brought by the Trump Justice Department was "politically motivated"

https://t.co/INOk0BQrou
The Crown Prosecution Service, which represents the US government in the extradition proceedings, has contended WikiLeaks is in the "business of encouraging individuals to hack into computers"—clearly criminalizing their decade-plus record of journalism. https://t.co/b1aE1galtQ
I see a bench inside of a glass container, where Assange will be isolated during the announcement of extradition decision. This has been standard practice during his case, even after he complained about how it infringed upon his ability to participate in his defense.
Overheard Fitzgerald, who is on Assange legal team, complaining about lack of water.

"It's not as bad as Iwo Jima, I suppose..."
Some more background ahead of decision: the Crown Prosecution Service maintained it was inappropriate for court to factor torture or war crimes revelations by Assange/WikiLeaks into decision.
https://t.co/HG7XP9nasD
In addition to the revelations around UC Global spying on Assange while he was in embassy, during extradition trial we also learned FBI seized legally privileged materials from him https://t.co/i9ibcwax6G
Assange is now seated in glass container. Court is in session.
Judge finds Assange is not protected by US/UK treaty and the Extradition Act of 2003, which does not protect against prosecution for political offenses, is what governs
Baraitser says Assange’s alleged activities went beyond mere encouragement of journalist. She outlines the alleged password-cracking conspiracy.
Baraitser heavily relies on AUSA Gordon Kromberg, whose submissions to the court were treated as sacrosanct during extradition trial. Kromberg never testified as witness. These are prosecutorial claims untested by Assange legal team.
Baraitser is repeating general allegations added in the superseding indictment issued in summer of 2020 and sprung on defense attorneys weeks before extradition trial.
Baraitser, referring to allegations of hacking in 2020 indictment, says this took [Assange] outside of any role of investigative journalism." He was trying to obtain information by hacking.
Baraitser: Free speech rights do not provide "unfettered discretion by Mr Assange to decide what he’s going to publish"
Judge cites this Guardian column condemning WikiLeaks as part of evidence (or justification) for extradition decision
https://t.co/ww0Ozi5V1x
Baraitser appears to have found Assange in violation of Official Secrets Act

If proven allegations "would therefore amount to offenses in this jurisdiction that would not be protected by his freedom of speech"
Baraitser says prosecutors brought charges against Assange in good faith

Also asserts insufficient evidence that decision was made not to prosecute Assange under Obama
Baraitser dismisses the allegations against UC Global related to spying on Assange in the Ecuador embassy.

She says it is inappropriate for court to make findings of fact on evidence still being investigated in Spain.
Baraitser cites a CNN article as evidence or justification for US government to engage in spying operation against Assange and the Ecuador embassy

Here is that article from 2019:
https://t.co/tbK3QDm3Fs
Judge did not find Assange would face grave problems...in light of passage of time since alleged offenses
Baraitser: Constitutional and procedural protections will be applied to Assange’s trial to ensure it is a fair trial
Baraitser essentially argues a US court is equipped to determine whether Espionage Act allows for prosecution against Assange (publisher) for the offenses alleged. She mentions challenges against overbreadth can be made during pretrial.
Baraitser does not believe US court would be able—or would try—to deny Assange rights under the US Constitution, as he will be put on trial on US soil
Baraitser goes on to add trust that US court will properly consider Assange’s right to freedom of speech
Judge accepted doctors' opinions that Assange sufferes from recurrent depressive disorder and suffers from autism (though he is a highly functioning case)
Baraitser says Assange is at high risk of suicide and that there is a "real risk" he will be detained subject to special administrative measures (SAMs) in US prison, especially because intelligence community is hostile to him
Baraitser: Extradition would be oppressive by reason of Assange’s mental health
The United States government's mass incarceration system just lost them their case against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange
Holy shit, the judge ends saying she is satisfied that procedures described by US would not prevent Assange from finding a way to commit suicide in US supermax prison
The judge and defense are discussing an application for bail. US government is going to immediately appeal.
BREAKING: Judge rules against US extradition of Julian Assange, contending extradition would be oppressive by reason of Assange’s mental health
Citing WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange's mental health, a British judge rejects the US government's extradition request
https://t.co/db9Zq33qWi
Key sections in British court's decision against US extradition request and why the judge determined it would be oppressive to approve the request against Assange
This is suddenly one of most crucial reports I wrote during Julian Assange's extradition trial.

As I noted, precedent in Lauri Love's case could have implications for Assange, especially since Fitzgerald, Assange attorney, was involved in the Love case

https://t.co/4CtEfDjmTj
Judge Baraitser accepted virtually all of allegations against Assange that made this a dangerous case for press freedom.

Despite the fact that the request was rejected, there is plenty in this ruling to cause alarm. Because someone else could easily be criminalized in future.
Fitzgerald tells judge they would like to make bail application on Wednesday. #Assange
Judge grants Assange legal team's request for time to prepare bail application and schedules hearing for Wednesday
In the final minutes of the live feed from court, Assange turns to someone talking to him and we see a grin.
Court is adjourned. I'll be covering the bail application hearing on Wednesday. Until then, I'm moderating a panel discussion on the ruling hosted by @DefenseAssange at 3 pm ET.

It will feature Noam Chomsky, Marjorie Cohn, and Daniel Ellsberg.

https://t.co/StgRXsTt3k
Also I curate a newsletter called The Dissenter that you can subscribe to for further reporting on Assange extradition decision (as well as whistleblower stories).

Today I'm offering a 50 percent discount to all who sign up for a year.

https://t.co/V1iTt1Ieka
I'm going live at the top of the hour with a breakdown of the extradition decision in Julian Assange's case

https://t.co/Lapo5PbAgp

More from Legal

Jesse Hynes
Jesse Hynes
@jesse_hynes
A necessary clarification needs to be made with regards to securities laws because I’ve been seeing a theory lately not based on law but based on false presumptions. Before I do so, I want to note that I DO NOT think that XRP is a security (before I get “FUD” responses). 1/

Here it goes: There has been a theory that the SEC should only be pursuing the sales of XRP by Ripple, and once it exchanges hands it is no longer a security. Basically the theory is that the XRP the common investor holds (who bought off an exchange) is not a security because 2/

there is no privity with Ripple. Stated differently, the assumption is the SEC should categorize XRP into two pots: 1) XRP sold by Ripple and 2) all other XRP . The theory continues that a difference should be made and the SEC should clarify that it is only alleging the 3/

transactions made by Ripple to be transactions of securities. This theory is a fallacy. I’ve seen this theory argued by comparing XRP to a stock and noting the differences. It is important to note that this type of comparison cannot apply. 4/

The SEC is not alleging that XRP is a stock, but rather an “investment contract”. An Investment Contract is (1) an investment of money (2) in a common enterprise (3) with the expectation of profit (4) derived solely from the efforts of others. 5/
LEGAL
Heidi Cuda
Heidi Cuda
@Heidi_Cuda
🤮”Former FBI director William Sessions once condemned Russia's mafia. ‘We can beat organized crime,’ he told a Moscow conference in 1997.

“Today,Sessions is a lawyer for Semyon Mogilevich..one of Russia's most powerful organized-crime figures.” @wsj 2007

“Sessions is trying to negotiate a deal with the U.S. Department of Justice for his client, who is charged with racketeering and is a key figure in a separate Justice Department probe of energy deals between Russia and Ukraine.”-@wsj 2007

“A number of notable Washington insiders are earning big fees these days by representing controversial clients from the former Soviet Union.”-@wsj 2007 archives

“From prominent businessmen—some facing criminal allegations—to top politicians, well-known ex-Soviets are lining up to hire help with criminal cases, lobbying and consulting.”-@WSJ 2007 archives

“These figures, many of whom made fortunes in the wide-open 1990s amid the Soviet Union's disintegration,hire Washington insiders to help rehabilitate their reputations in the West or to persuade investors and regulators they are committed to good corporate governance.”-@WSJ 2007
LEGAL
Advertisement
Carissa Byrne Hessick
Carissa Byrne Hessick
@CBHessick
I have seen so many people (including folks on #lawtwitter) comparing what happened at the Capitol yesterday with the violence and property damage that happened in some cities during protests last summer.

Let me explain what is wrong with that analogy . . . . .

To clarify -- my disagreement is not with those who are pointing out that law enforcement didn't respond with the same level of force and arrests at the capitol as it did during BLM protests.

That comparison deserves to be drawn and it raises some very important questions.

My disagreement is with those who are saying that what happened at the Capitol yesterday is so similar to what happened during protests this summer, that people's reactions ought to be similar--a suggestion that those reacting more strongly now are hypocritical.

Here's one example of someone (a law professor) making the argument. But I've seen it plastered across the site all day, it keeps cropping up in my mentions, and so I want to respond.


There are a number of things that distinguish what happened at the Capitol from what happened during BLM protests. The most obvious is the reason that people protested---some protested about factually false claims about election fraud; others about real police shootings.
LEGAL
Shannon Watts
Shannon Watts
@shannonrwatts
Today our organization unveiled a new policy plan to eliminate armed intimidation from politics by prohibiting guns at Capitol buildings and grounds, sensitive government facilities, polling and vote counting locations, and protests on public property.

We’re already working closely with our allies in state legislatures, and we saw a related bill passed in Michigan and similar bills introduced in Vermont, Washington, and Virginia. We expect more given the horror we’ve seen on our TV screens.

The chaos and violence that took place at the Capitol last week was horrifying, but not surprising. @MomsDemand volunteers have been confronted by these armed insurrectionists in our communities ever since I started Moms Demand Action in 2012.

At rallies and marches, inside restaurants and grocery stores, and even in statehouses and at gun bill hearings, our volunteers have gone toe-to-toe with gun extremists seeking to intimidate and silence them.


In Virginia, armed men with rifles strapped to their backs have stood in the back of small hearing rooms inside the General Assembly, while our volunteers are in chairs in front of them, facing forward. They say it feels like the men could open fire on their backs at any moment.
LEGAL
Absurdistwords
Absurdistwords
@absurdistwords
More severe police injuries and deaths on that one day of rampaging Trumpers than in five years of Anti-Police protests.


You can tell a lot about the stance of a angry crowd by whether they come with shields or pitchforks.

If people protesting police brutality for years had wanted to use their large numbers to attack, maim and kill police, they damn well could have.

But they came to resist police.

Which is completely different.

Why did the police suffer more at the hands of those who claimed to support them and waved their flags than at the hands of those who think they should be defunded or abolished?

Because one group is literally arguing for human dignity and the other glorifies violence.

The people who uncritically support police brutality are those who believe that instrumental violence should be a standard tool in response to those standing opposed to you.

Once you accept that... WHO is standing opposed to you doesn't matter much.
LEGAL

You May Also Like

Jonathan Ware
Jonathan Ware
@ReassessHistory
Rhino Barges

One of the dullest, coolest, more bizarre and fascinating pieces of kit used in Normandy.

Which NO ONE REALLY CARES ABOUT.

BUT I DO AND YOU SHOULD TOO.
/1

#WW2 #SWW #History


Planning for Overlord and Neptune had a serious snag, how to get troops from LSTs onto the beach as simply ramming them onto the beaches and dropping the ramp was known to damage the exceptionally vulnerable LSTs and felt to be unsustainable in the mid to long term. /2


LSTs were essential in sustaining Overlord's progress and were a subject of major headaches in the planning phase, and a real subject of friction when it came to launching additional amphibious operations such as Dragoon.

A single LSTs loss represented a capability nick. /3


So, logic dictated, we don't really want these remarkable but rare and highly valuable vessels constantly doing beach landings, we want something to act as a medium between ship to shore, and in came the (mostly) American designed Rhino. /4


I fucking love Rhinos.

Seriously.

Graceful lines of pure industrial pedigree.

Modular.

LOOK AT IT. /5
HISTORY
itrade(DJ)
itrade(DJ)
@ITRADE191
Here is the detailed information of about strategy,

Entry time : 9.30 - 10
Exit : Upto you

Strategy :
Sell weekly ATM CE & PE at almost equal price
For ex : Sell Nifty 17250 CE at 50 and Nifty 17250 PE at 48 so it will become short straddle

Buy monthly ATM or near ATM CE & PE at matching price (5-10 points diff should be fine) as hedge
For ex : Buy Nifty 17250 CE at 150 and Nifty 17300 PE at 155 so it will become long straddle.

Weekly Short straddle + Monthly Long straddle

Adjustment:

• If you feel slightly bullish/bearish then no adjustment needed
• If Nifty moves 50 up or down and sustain then just simply roll up or down half of qnty and keep rest of the quantity. If market goes up or down further then roll up or down rest.

• If Nifty moves one side or about to breach BEP then add equal amount of lot. This can balance tested side. For ex: If I bought 17300 CE 4 lot as hedge then add 4 lot so you will have only one side risk . Note: Remember to keep SL at cost price (only for additional lot bought)

Capital requirement:
2.2 L for 4 lot
Adjustment requires additional capital upto 1L

Note : High risk high reward strategy, please don’t execute until you fully understand. Kindly do paper trading or backtest.
RR : 1:1
POP : 45-55%
OPTIONSLEARNINGS , ALL
Advertisement
ArmaniTalks \U0001f399\U0001f525
ArmaniTalks 🎙🔥...
@ArmaniTalks
Manipulation Sign:

If you are compromising too much, there is a chance that you are getting manipulated.

Why are you the one that's always compromising?

How come the other person always gets their way?

Be more curious.

If something seems off, stick up for yourself.

'Wait, you sure I am being manipulated?'

I have no clue, that is only something that you can decide for yourself.

'Dang is there anything I need to look out for?'

Plenty..

But let me give you a few things to look out for.

👇

I see manipulation as skillfully controlling someone's behavior for egotistical or unethical purposes.

'How come people don't leave when it's happening to them?'

Because most people have 0 clue that they are being manipulated.

1. Guilt Trip

You ever made a mistake around someone, only for them to hold it over your head?

The will always bring up the mistake when you 2 are not seeing eye to eye.

These people will use that mistake as leverage to get what they want from you in the future.

Look out.

2. The Rationalizer

This person will commit the worst acts & find a way to rationalize it.

Example: cheaters when they get caught.

They have every excuse in the book for why they did it.

Heck, they are so good at rationalizing, they will make it seem like your fault.
LIFE
Anu Satheesh \U0001f1ee\U0001f1f3
Anu Satheesh 🇮🇳...
@AnuSatheesh5
Mangottu Bhagavathi Temple
#Palakkad #Kerala
#keralatemples 🚩

Mangottu Bhagavathi Temple is situated in Athipotta near Alathur of palakkad district. Devi is kshipraprasadi here and grants relief to those who worship with full faith.
Mookken Chathen, situated on the Northern 👇


side of the temple, is guarding Devi here.
Story says that, once there lived a weaver named Kuttan who was a Devi Bhaktan. During one festival time Kuttan was so pleased by the Devi Vigraham that he requested her to come along with him. At that time wind blew heavily and Cloths


in Vigraham flew. Kuttan immediately decorated Devi with his cloth which stuck to Vigraham and returned to his village and with his Umbrella. Devi came with him in that Umbrella and stayed in his place. This place is Mangottu Bhagavathi temple now.

Amme Narayana
🙏🕉🙏
ALL
James Clear
James Clear
@JamesClear
My top 10 tweets of the year

A thread 👇

https://t.co/xj4js6shhy


https://t.co/b81zoW6u1d


https://t.co/1147it02zs


https://t.co/A7XCU5fC2m
BUSINESS , ALL