Lady Emma Arbuthnot, the Westminster chief magistrate enmeshed in a conflict of interest, will no longer be presiding over the extradition proceedings of imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange, said WikiLeaks lawyer Jen Robinson, at an event in Sydney on Friday night .
“Yes,
there was some controversy about her sitting on the case,” Robinson
said. “She won’t be sitting on the case going forward.” Robinson told
Australian journalist Quentin Dempster at the event that she was “not
sure” who would take over from Arbuthnot.
Robinson
made her remarks in response to a question from the audience about
Arbuthnot’s reported conflict of interest in the case. Robinson did not
provide further details. She spoke in future tense, but it is not clear
if she was referring to Arbuthnot maintaining supervision of the case
while turning over the courtroom duties to another judge, which she did
weeks ago, retaining the right to influence rulings, or whether
Arbuthnot has recused herself from the case. Consortium News has contacted Robinson to provide clarification.
On Thursday, Matt Kennard and Mark Curtis of the Daily Maverick reported:
“Lady Arbuthnot has recently appointed a district judge to rule on
Assange’s extradition case, but remains the supervising legal figure in
the process. According to the UK courts service, the chief magistrate is ‘responsible for… supporting and guiding district judge colleagues.’”
The
report said that Arbuthnot’s husband, Lord Arbuthnot of Edrom, a former
British defense minister, “has financial links to the British military
establishment, including institutions and individuals exposed by
WikiLeaks.” It said the judge herself had also received gifts “including
from a military and cybersecurity company exposed by WikiLeaks.”
Here are some Tweets:
DECLASSIFIED UK: Julian Assange’s judge and her husband’s links to the British military establishment exposed by WikiLeaks https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-11-14-julian-assanges-judge-and-her-husbands-links-to-the-british-military-establishment-exposed-by-wikileaks/ … #ConflictOfInterest
Here's C.I.'s "Iraq snapshot:"
Friday, November 15, 2019. Rape enabler Deval Patrick continues his
pursuit of the Democratic Party's presidential nomination, protests
continue in Iraq, MSNBC struggle to portray the campaigns of Bernie
Sanders and Elizabeth Warren accurately or fairly, and much more.
In the US, the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination continues. Rape enabler Deval Patrick has entered the ring. SLATE's Jim Newell offers:
Deval Patrick
If only theories mattered.
Search results
In the US, the race for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination continues. Rape enabler Deval Patrick has entered the ring. SLATE's Jim Newell offers:
Deval Patrick
If only theories mattered.
Unlike certain would-be candidates considering
entrances into the race whose names rhyme with Doomberg and Pillory, the
former Massachusetts governor can, at least, draw up a plausible theory
on paper for his newly launched candidacy. The field still lacks a
formidable center-left consensus candidate who can bridge the party from
Joe Biden on one end and Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders on the
other. Pete Buttigieg is trying to do it, but his base is too lily-white
to break out after New Hampshire. Patrick—who, like Buttigieg, is
trying to push against both the center and the left in his early messaging—would,
in theory, have some purchase in New Hampshire, given his history as
governor of the neighboring state to which many Granite Staters commute,
and, in theory, translate that into a strong finish in South Carolina,
where he could, again in theory,
have a relative advantage as a black American. Aren’t these neat
theories? Can’t you see how an unemployed consultant needing a paycheck
might excitably pitch it to Patrick? How wealthy donors, in a lather
about Elizabeth Warren, might be taken with it? It’s so neat, so
consultant-driven, and so pitchable to dumb donors that the Surge is
comfortable predicting that Patrick is doomed to go absolutely nowhere. To wit.
Search results
How is No One in the lame stream media talking about this!?
Deval Patrick fired leaders of the Massachusetts Sex Offender Registry in 2014 for trying to register Patrick’s brother in-law for a 1993 California rape conviction.
My goodness. No no and no again. This is a dealbreaker for me. Deval Patrick's former brother-in-law gets prison time in rape, kidnapping
In 2014, Deval Patrick fired the head of the state’s Sex Offender Registry Board because she questioned why Patrick’s brother in law wasn’t required to register for a 1993 spousal rape conviction. #Trump2020
Former Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick’s Ex-Brother-In-Law Gets Prison For Rape
So Deval Patrick fired some ppl to protect his brother-in-law, who went on to rape (another) woman in 2019.
And Mike Bloomberg said some nasty s**t about women.
Bernie Sanders must be *REALLY* surging in Dems' internal numbers for them to run these two losers. Chrissakes. 
twitter.com/mldauber/statu…
In 2014 Deval Patrick fired leaders of his state's Sex Offender Registry for trying to force his brother in law to register due to being convicted of rape in California in 1993.
In 2019, that same rapist was sentenced to 6 years for another rape....
twitter.com/mldauber/statu…
In 2014 Deval Patrick fired leaders of his state's Sex Offender Registry for trying to force his brother in law to register due to being convicted of rape in California in 1993.
In 2019, that same rapist was sentenced to 6 years for another rape....
Dear Kamala Harris,
You didn't hear this from me but the word on the street Deval Patrick protects sexual predators, please prosecute that ass for me.
Thanks,
Rape and Molestation survivor
Deval Patrick, when is rape a family matter? Your BIL raped your sister not once but twice. You demoted a whistleblower because he wanted to register him as a sex offender. If you do that what would you do as president?
For those confused by "family matter,'' refer to this HEAVY article and how the response by Deval's campaign was to insist this was a family matter and the children!!!! the poor children!!!! They never knew and now they did wah!!! Wah!!!! Wah!!!!
If you're convicted of a crime -- and, yes, rape is a crime, don't whine that your children found out about it because of the press. You were convicted of a crime. That was a public case. Maybe you talk to your children about it. But you don't whine, "They reported on my being convicted!!!! Oh the babies, the poor little babies!!!"
Grow the hell up.
And we don't need a rape enabler, a rape apologist, running for the White House. Any person even aware of optics would be insisting Deval drop out. That months after this rapist brother-in-law was sentenced Deval is thinking of running speaks of something far worse than mere arrogance.
Deval Patrick spoke at my Graduation. Come to find out that he’s a rape apologist?!? Disgusted.
Add this to the misogyny
In 2014 Deval Patrick fired leaders of his state's Sex Offender Registry for trying to force his brother in law to register due to being convicted of rape in California in 1993.
In 2019, that same rapist was sentenced to 6 years for another rape. 1/
So the Democratic big donors still don't get that being a rape enabler is disqualifying, and they throw us Deval Patrick. This is why we need a Warren or a Bernie.
Deval Patrick's former brother-in-law gets prison time in rape, kidnapping
People out here stannin for Deval Patrick?
Please go sit the f**k on down.
Deval Patrick fired the leader's of the Sex Offender Registry in his state in 2014.
Why?
Tried to register his bro-in-law as a sex offender.
Dude raped Deval's sister.
Spousal rape.
CANCELLED
Meanwhile, at IN THESE TIMES, Branko Marcetik maintains:
Once known as the lone, forthright voice of liberalism
on cable news, MSNBC began a lurch to the center in 2015 with its new
chairman, Andrew Lack, going on a conservative pundit hiring spree and
shedding the network’s “Lean Forward” branding.
Even so, MSNBC is positioned to have an outsized influence on the 2020 Democratic presidential primary. According to the Norman Lear Center, liberals watch MSNBC at (respectively) three and 10 times the rate of more moderate and conservative viewers. After Fox News, MSNBC is the most-watched cable news network, beating out CNN. What’s more, the median age of MSNBC’s audience is 65—and older voters turn out in high numbers in primary contests.
Even so, MSNBC is positioned to have an outsized influence on the 2020 Democratic presidential primary. According to the Norman Lear Center, liberals watch MSNBC at (respectively) three and 10 times the rate of more moderate and conservative viewers. After Fox News, MSNBC is the most-watched cable news network, beating out CNN. What’s more, the median age of MSNBC’s audience is 65—and older voters turn out in high numbers in primary contests.
To understand how MSNBC may be shaping the 2020 election, In These Times analyzed the network’s August and September coverage
of the Democratic presidential contest’s leading candidates—Sen. Bernie
Sanders, former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Elizabeth Warren. We
focused on the network’s flagship primetime shows: The 11th Hour
with Brian Williams, All In with Chris Hayes, The Beat with Ari Melber,
Hardball with Chris Matthews, The Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell and The Rachel Maddow Show.
In These Times tallied how often the three candidates were discussed and logged whether the coverage was positive, negative or neutral. For example, while poll results by themselves (whether favorable or unfavorable to a candidate) were simply logged as neutral, commentary about a candidate “surging” was logged as positive and “stagnant” as negative. Clips and previews for upcoming segments were not included.
The coverage quickly revealed a pattern. Over the two months, these six programs focused on Biden, often to the exclusion of Warren and Sanders. Sanders received not only the least total coverage (less than one-third of Biden’s), but the most negative. As to the substance, MSNBC’s reporting revolved around poll results and so-called electability.
In These Times tallied how often the three candidates were discussed and logged whether the coverage was positive, negative or neutral. For example, while poll results by themselves (whether favorable or unfavorable to a candidate) were simply logged as neutral, commentary about a candidate “surging” was logged as positive and “stagnant” as negative. Clips and previews for upcoming segments were not included.
The coverage quickly revealed a pattern. Over the two months, these six programs focused on Biden, often to the exclusion of Warren and Sanders. Sanders received not only the least total coverage (less than one-third of Biden’s), but the most negative. As to the substance, MSNBC’s reporting revolved around poll results and so-called electability.
Let's hope they did better with their number crunching than they did with their research on MSNBC's 'history.'
It was never a liberal channel. After hitting the gutter with Mike Savage's hiring, they tried to regroup with Keith Olbermann. Keith was a known sexist who never would have survived in today's #MeToo culture. We didn't quote him, we didn't note him. He was supposedly the biggest liberal on TV (he wasn't). He gets Rachel Maddow on the channel. That would be the same Rachel that supported the Iraq War. That would be the same Rachel who then got an AIR AMERICA show (UNFILTERED) in 2004 where she -- like Al Franken -- would argue that you couldn't talk about withdrawal of US troops from Iraq and the troops were already there so you do nothing. You certainly don't invite on antiwar activists. The closest UNFILTERED came to an antiwar activist was Arianna Huffington -- and even with Arianna they were struggling.
Randi Rhodes would rightly mock and call out Rachel's big Iraq special that she did on MSNBC.
MSNBC got rid of Cenk Uygur in 2011. (Cenk is not a liberal but he was too much for MSNBC.) MSNBC launched one attack after another on Cindy Sheehan -- including Norah O'Donnell's hideous June 2006 attack. MSNBC couldn't find war resisters when other networks could.
They were always loud, they were just never left.
In Iraq, the protests continue.
#Iraq
Today in city Kut south east of #Baghdad, AlAmareh province
People protest against Iran regime puppets
#العراق_ينتقض #IraqProtests
A new development?
A lion joins Iraq’s protests dlvr.it/RJLQg0
MEANWHILE IN #IRAQ
Iraqi protesters bring LION to the protesting areas after security forces intervened protests with Police dogs.
Some may think that's comic or cute. It's not, it's stupid.
The lion is placed in danger, absolutely.
Look closely. Military-grade grenades are killing protesters in Iraq.
More to the point, tear gas and sonic booms are taking place. How is the lion going to react to that? If the lion panics -- a natural response -- might the lion harms people around -- such as the protesters.
Just the fact that danger is possible from this incredibly stupid move could provide the government with cover to shut down the protests.
This was beyond stupid.
Over 310 protesters have been killed in the last month with another 15,000 injured. And into that climate, you're bringing an animal?
Beyond stupid.
In other news, Ali Choukeir (24 MATINS) reports:
Grand Ayatollah Ali Sistani said
authorities must respond quickly to the demands of the protesters who
have thronged Baghdad and cities across the mainly Shiite south since
early October in an outpouring of anger over rampant corruption and lack
of jobs.
“If those in power think that they can evade the benefits of real reform by stalling and procrastination, they are delusional,” Sistani said in his weekly sermon, delivered by a representative in the Shiite holy city of Karbala
“What comes after these protests will not be the same as before, and they should be aware of that.”
Mustafa Habib reports:
Breaking: In a tough speech, the senior cleric in #Iraq Ali #Sistani slaps the whole political class:- "I support the demonstrations & condemned the killing-Kidnapping of protesters, and the govt has not implemented any real demand of the #IraqProtests so far. (1)
"Iraqis only found the protest and gave big sacrifices during the demonstrations is the only way to save the country form corruption and devastation by all the political class which turned the country into personal gains by keeping silent about each other's corruption" (2)
"If the political class thinks they can dodge and evade the real reforms, they are delusional, because the situation after the protests will not be like before it, so be careful, but there are doubts about the ability of the political class to implement real reforms" (3)
"A new electoral law must be passed and this law must reflecting the real voter representation, and an independent electoral commission must be established that would gain the trust of voters, this is the way to replace the political class that rules the country after 2003" (4)
"The Iraqi battle for reform is a national battle, not allowed to any regional or international side Interference in this" (5)
Mustafa Habib's reporting frequently appears at NIQASH and they have a number of reports on the protests throughout Iraq on their home page.
The following sites updated:
No comments:
Post a Comment