Connect with us

Politics

Australian lawmakers send letter urging Biden to drop case against Julian Assange on World Press Freedom Day

Published

on

Australian lawmakers send letter urging Biden to drop case against Julian Assange on World Press Freedom Day

A group of Australian lawmakers wrote to President Biden on World Press Freedom Day urging him to drop the charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange as press freedom groups call for the release of Assange and other journalists around the world facing legal cases.

In a Friday letter, the co-chairs of the “Bring Julian Assange Home” Parliamentary Friendship Group – Members of Parliament Andrew Wilkie, Independent; Josh Wilson, Labor Party; Bridget Archer, Liberal Party, and Sen. David Shoebridge, Greens – called on Biden to end the prosecution of Assange, who is in a U.K. prison fighting extradition to the U.S. to face espionage charges for publishing classified American military documents 14 years ago.

A hearing will be held May 20 in front of the British High Court in London to determine if Assange, an Australian publisher, can be extradited to the U.S. to stand trial or if he can make a full appeal challenging his extradition. If the court rules in favor of extradition, Assange’s only remaining option would be at the European Court of Human Rights.

“On World Press Freedom Day, we write as a group of Australian Parliamentarians from across the political spectrum seeking the freedom of Julian Assange,” the lawmakers wrote. “We write in the hope that Mr. Assange, who has endured maximum security imprisonment in the United Kingdom’s Belmarsh Prison for more than five years without conviction on any substantial charge, can go free, can go home, can be reunited with his wife, children, and family.”

ASSANGE EXTRADITION CASE MOVES FORWARD AFTER US ASSURES UK COURT THERE WILL BE NO DEATH PENALTY

Advertisement

A group of Australian lawmakers wrote to President Biden on World Press Freedom Day asking him to drop the charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. (Getty Images)

Assange, 52, faces 17 counts under the Espionage Act for allegedly receiving, possessing and communicating classified information to the public, as well as one charge alleging conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. If extradited, Assange would stand trial in Alexandria, Virginia, and could face up to 175 years in a maximum security prison if convicted.

The charges were brought by the Trump administration’s DOJ over WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of cables leaked by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, and the Biden administration has continued that prosecution. The information detailed alleged war crimes committed by the U.S. government in Iraq, Afghanistan and the detention camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, as well as instances of the CIA engaging in torture and rendition.

The letter comes after Biden said last month he is considering a request from Australia to drop the charges against Assange.

“We were heartened by President Biden’s recent acknowledgment that the United States is considering Australia’s request to end the prosecution of Julian Assange,” the letter reads. “We respectfully urge the United States to discontinue the long, expensive, and punishing extradition process that prevents Mr Assange from returning to his family in Australia.”

Advertisement

The White House did not respond to Fox News Digital’s request for comment.

SQUAD AND MARJORIE TAYLOR GREENE JOIN 16 LAWMAKERS CALLING ON BIDEN TO FREE JULIAN ASSANGE

Assange has been held at London’s high-security Belmarsh Prison since he was removed from the Ecuadorian Embassy on April 11, 2019, for breaching bail conditions. He had sought asylum at the embassy since 2012 to avoid being sent to Sweden over allegations he raped two women because Sweden would not provide assurances it would protect him from extradition to the U.S. The investigations into the sexual assault allegations were eventually dropped.

A U.K. district court judge had rejected the U.S. extradition request in 2021 on the grounds that Assange was likely to kill himself if held under harsh U.S. prison conditions. Higher courts overturned that decision after getting assurances from the U.S. about his treatment.

Assange’s lawyers have continued to fight against his extradition, currently seeking the opportunity for a full appeal following the May 20 hearing, which comes after the U.S. provided assurances to the U.K. last month that Assange would not face new charges that could lead to the death penalty. They also said he would be allowed to make a First Amendment argument in a U.S. courtroom – things Assange’s lawyers and family described as empty promises.

Advertisement

In March, when the British court asked the U.S. to provide assurances, it rejected most of Assange’s appeals – six of nine he lodged, including allegations of a political prosecution and concerns about an alleged CIA plot under the Trump administration to kidnap or kill Assange while he remained hunkered down in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of the Labor Party has said “there is nothing to be served by his ongoing incarceration” and the Leader of the Opposition, Peter Dutton of the Liberal Party, has said he believes this case has “gone on for too long.”

In February, the House of Representatives in the Australian Parliament passed a motion demanding Assange be freed, stressing “the importance of the U.K. and the U.S.A. bringing the matter to a close so that Mr. Assange can return home to his family in Australia.”

BRITISH COURT RULES JULIAN ASSANGE EXTRADITION ON PAUSE UNTIL US GUARANTEES NO DEATH PENALTY

Stella Assange, wife of Julian Assange, speaks beside a poster of her husband at the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Feb. 21, 2024. (AP)

Advertisement

A cross-party delegation of Australian lawmakers visited Washington, D.C., in September and met with U.S. officials, members of Congress and civil rights groups in an attempt to secure Assange’s freedom.

“While we believe the prosecution of Julian Assange is wrong as a matter of principle, we say in any case that there is no justice, compassion, or reasonable purpose in the further persecution of Mr. Assange when one considers the duration and harsh conditions of the detention he has already suffered,” the letter concludes.

The Obama administration in 2013 decided not to indict Assange over WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of classified cables because it would have had to also indict journalists from major news outlets who published the same materials.

President Obama also commuted Manning’s 35-year sentence for violations of the Espionage Act and other offenses to seven years in January 2017, and Manning, who had been imprisoned since 2010, was released later that year.

No publisher had been charged under the Espionage Act until Assange, and many press freedom groups have said his prosecution sets a dangerous precedent intended to criminalize journalism.

Advertisement

“President Biden has repeatedly said that journalism is not a crime, all the while his administration continues to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange under the Espionage Act for acts that journalists engage in every day,” Caitlin Vogus, Deputy Director of Advocacy at Freedom of the Press Foundation, told Fox News Digital. “To truly celebrate World Press Freedom Day, the Biden administration should immediately drop the Espionage Act charges against Assange.”

She continued: “If the DOJ tried to prosecute reporters at the New York Times or Wall Street Journal under the Espionage Act for speaking to sources, obtaining classified information, and publishing that information, we would rightfully see it as a severe threat to the First Amendment. The Espionage Act prosecution of Assange threatens press freedom by opening the door to precisely those kinds of prosecutions of journalists by the current or future administrations.”

Reporters Without Borders Executive Director Clayton Weimers told Fox News Digital that the prosecution of Assange “could set a very dangerous precedent for American press freedom.”

“This would be the first time the Espionage Act, an archaic law badly in need of reform, would be used to punish the publisher of factual information, not just the leaker,” he said. “In this case, the leaker, Chelsea Manning, has already served her sentence. But if the Justice Department is successful in prosecuting Assange, they’re opening the door to prosecuting any journalist or media outlet – including Fox News – to prosecution for publishing government secrets, even if that publication is in the public interest.”

On World Press Freedom Day, many other journalists around the world are facing legal cases for their journalistic work, including Wall Street Journal reporter Evan Gershkovich, who is being held in Russia on espionage charges for allegedly stealing secret military documents.

Advertisement

“We continue to call for the Kremlin to release Evan Gershkovich, and indeed for the release of all wrongly jailed journalists around the world,” Weimers said. “We also call on the State Department to designate journalist Alsu Kurmasheva, a US citizen, as ‘wrongfully detained.’”

ARTIST THREATENS TO DESTROY PICASSO, REMBRANDT, WARHOL MASTERPIECES WITH ACID IF JULIAN ASSANGE DIES IN PRISON

Julian Assange faces 17 counts under the Espionage Act for allegedly receiving, possessing and communicating classified information to the public, as well as one charge alleging conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. (AP)

When governments arrest or imprison journalists for covering the news, Vogus said, it “threatens everyone’s freedom and ability to be informed.”

“Arresting journalists for covering the news is an authoritarian bullying tactic whether it’s happening in Russia or Austin, Texas,” she said. “Compelling reporters to reveal their confidential sources will make whistleblowers less likely to come forward. Sources often risk their livelihoods and even their freedom to tell journalists what they know about corruption, crimes, and wrongdoing.”

Advertisement

Reporters Without Borders downgraded the U.S. to 55 among nations in the 2024 World Press Freedom Index.

“The U.S. should be a beacon for press freedom around the world. Instead, we have recently seen journalists in the U.S. arrested and prosecuted simply for doing their jobs across the country, and witnessed growing distrust fueled by the irresponsible rhetoric of some political officials,” National Press Club president Emily Wilkins and National Press Club Journalism Institute president Gil Klein said in a statement. “The falling ranking of the U.S. in the World Press Freedom Index shows that we are headed in the wrong direction.”

The Freedom of the Press Foundation, Reporters Without Borders, National Press Club and many other press freedom groups are urging Congress to pass the bipartisan PRESS Act, which would prevent the federal government from compelling journalists to reveal their sources and confidential work.

Advertisement

Politics

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

Published

on

Video: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

new video loaded: President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

transcript

transcript

President Fires Noem as Homeland Security Secretary

President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

“The fact that you can’t admit to a mistake which looks like under investigation is going to prove that Ms. Good and Mr. Pretti probably should not have been shot in the face and in the back. Law enforcement needs to learn from that. You don’t protect them by not looking after the facts.” “Our greatness calls people to us for a chance to prosper, to live how they choose, to become part of something special. Anyone who searches for freedom can always find a home here. But that freedom is a precious thing, and we defend it vigorously. You crossed the border illegally — we’ll find you. Break our laws — we’ll punish you.” “Did you bid out those service contracts?” “Yes they did. They went out to a competitive bid.” “I’m asking you — sorry to interrupt — but the president approved ahead of time you spending $220 million running TV ads across the country in which you are featured prominently?” “Yes, sir. We went through the legal processes. Did it correctly —” Did the president know you were going to do this?” “Yes.” “I’m more excited about just ready to get started. There’s a lot of work we can do to get the Department of Homeland Security working for the American people.”

Advertisement
President Trump fired Kristi Noem, his embattled homeland security secretary, on Thursday and announced his plans to replace her with Senator Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma.

By Jackeline Luna

March 5, 2026

Continue Reading

Politics

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

Published

on

DOJ continues Biden autopen probe despite former president unlikely to face charges

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Department of Justice (DOJ) is continuing its investigation into former President Joe Biden’s use of an autopen in the final months of his administration — focusing on pardons and commutations — though a senior official said Biden is unlikely to face criminal exposure.

A senior DOJ official told Fox News the autopen investigation is ongoing and not closed, adding investigators are reviewing clemency actions taken in the final months of the Biden administration.

The official also pointed out, however, that the use of an autopen by a sitting president is “established law.”

The issue under review is whether the autopen was used in violation of the law, specifically, whether Biden personally approved each name included on pardon and commutation lists.

Advertisement

A framed portrait shows former President Joe Biden’s signature and an autopen along “The Presidential Walk of Fame” outside the Oval Office of the White House.  (Andrew Harnick/Getty Images)

“These types of cases are tough. Executive privilege issues come into play,” the official said.

What is also clear, the official indicated, is that the target of any potential prosecution would not likely be Biden.

“It’s hard to imagine how [Biden] could be criminally liable for pardon power,” the senior DOJ official said.

BIDEN’S AUTOPEN PARDONS DISTURBED DOJ BRASS, DOCS SHOW, RAISING QUESTIONS WHETHER THEY ARE LEGALLY BINDING

Advertisement

The use of the autopen by former President Joe Biden remains under investigation. (AP Photo)

The official noted that one reason the former president would be unlikely to face charges stems from a 2024 Supreme Court ruling that originally involved current President Donald Trump but would also apply to Biden.

“We conclude that under our constitutional structure of separated powers, the nature of Presidential power requires that a former President have some immunity from criminal prosecution for official acts during his tenure in office,” the Supreme Court ruled in Trump v. United States in 2024. 

“At least with respect to the President’s exercise of his core constitutional powers, this immunity must be absolute.”

Sources familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital that U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s team continues to review the Biden White House’s reliance on an autopen, contradicting a recent New York Times report that indicated the investigation had been paused.

Advertisement

DOJ SIGNALS IT’S STILL DIGGING INTO BIDEN AUTOPEN USE DESPITE REPORTS PROBE FIZZLED

President Donald Trump has pushed for consequences for former President Joe Biden’s alleged use of the autopen. (Julia Demaree Nikhinson/AP Photo)

Trump has pushed for consequences over the autopen controversy, alleging on social media that aides acted unlawfully in its use and raising the prospect of perjury charges against Biden.

Biden has rejected those claims, saying in a statement last year he personally directed the decisions in question.

“Let me be clear: I made the decisions during my presidency,” Biden said. “I made the decisions about the pardons, executive orders, legislation and proclamations. Any suggestion that I didn’t is ridiculous and false.”

Advertisement

The House Oversight Committee has homed in on Biden’s clemency actions, including five controversial pardons for family members in the final days of his presidency, citing what it described as a lack of “contemporaneous documentation” confirming that Biden directly ordered the pardons.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

The committee asked the DOJ to investigate “all of former President Biden’s executive actions, particularly clemency actions, to assess whether legal action must be taken to void any action that the former president did not, in fact, take himself.”

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Oliver contributed to this report.

Advertisement

Related Article

Top Biden officials questioned and criticized how his team issued pardons, used autopen: report
Continue Reading

Politics

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Published

on

Anxiety grows among California Democrats as gubernatorial candidates rebuff calls to drop out

Despite a plea from the head of the California Democratic Party for underperforming candidates to drop out of the governor’s race, all but one of the party’s top hopefuls spurned the request.

Party leaders fear the growing possibility that the crowded field will split the Democratic electorate in the state’s June top-two primary election and result in two Republicans advancing to the November ballot, ensuring a Republican governor being elected for the first time since 2006.

His advice largely unheeded, state party Chairman Rusty Hicks on Thursday said the fate of a Democratic victory now rests squarely on the gubernatorial candidates who flouted him.

“The candidates for Governor now have a chance to showcase a viable path to win,” Hicks said in a statement Thursday.

Eight top Democratic candidates filed the official paperwork to appear on the June ballot after Hicks released a letter on Tuesday urging those “who cannot show meaningful progress towards winning” to drop out. Friday is the deadline to file to appear on the primary election ballot. On March 21, the secretary of state’s office will formally announce who will appear on the June ballot.

Advertisement

“It sounded like someone who has his head in the sand,” former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said of Hicks’ open letter. “[Most] of us filed within 24 hours of getting that letter. It created some press but not much else. It didn’t impact [most] of the candidates and it certainly didn’t impact my candidacy.”

Democratic strategist Elizabeth Ashford said it was appropriate for Hicks and other Democratic leaders to make a public plea as opposed to keeping such discussions solely behind closed doors.

But the response showed the limited power of the modern-day party bosses.

“It’s definitely not Tammany Hall,” said Ashford, referring to the storied Democratic political machine that had a grip on New York City politics for nearly a century. “The party and Rusty are influential and they are helpful and that is their role. I don’t think anyone would be comfortable with outright public strong-arming of specific candidates.”

Ashford, who worked for former Govs. Jerry Brown and Arnold Schwarzenegger, along with former Vice President Kamala Harris when she served as state attorney general, added that the minimal power of the state GOP is likely a factor in the dynamics of Democrats’ decision to stay in the race. Democratic registered voters outnumber Republicans by almost a 2-to-1 margin in the state, and Democrats control every statewide elected office and hold supermajorities in both chambers of the California Legislature.

Advertisement

“If there were a strong viable opposition that existed, if the Republican Party was actually relevant in California, I think that would sort of force greater unity amongst Democrats,” she said.

Just one of the nine major Democrats did heed the party chair’s message. Ian Calderon, a former Los Angeles-area Assemblyman who consistently polled near the bottom of the field, withdrew from the race and endorsed Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Dublin) on Thursday.

Candidates cannot withdraw their name from the ballot once they officially file to run for office, leading to some fears that even if other candidates drop out of the race, a crowded primary ballot could still split California’s liberal votes.

“I’m disappointed most of them will be on the ballot,” said Lorena Gonzalez, the head of the California Federation of Labor Unions, which will announce whether it endorses in the governor’s race on March 16. But “I do still think you can have people drop out of the race or become viable. I think that there are candidates who know viability is a real thing they have to show in coming weeks” before ballots start being mailed to voters.

Jodi Hicks, chief executive and president of Planned Parenthood Affiliates of California, said she is “still worried” about the prospect of two Republicans winning the top two spots in the June primary, shutting Democrats out of any chance of winning the governor’s office in November.

Advertisement

“I didn’t have any specifics of who I wanted to do what,” she said. “I’m just very, very concerned and the stakes are really high right now and seem to be getting worse by the day.”

Republican candidate Steve Hilton, a former Fox News host, said he is “confident that I’ll be in the top two” along with a Democratic candidate. “I find it very difficult to believe that the Democratic Party will just surrender California and allow two Republicans to be in the top two.”

Hilton made the comments Thursday after a gubernatorial forum in Sacramento hosted by the California Assn. of Realtors focused on housing and homeownership. Villaraigosa, former Health and Human Services Secretary Xavier Becerra, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan and former Rep. Katie Porter also attended. Swalwell, who is currently in Washington, joined the panel virtually.

During the panel, candidates were in broad agreement about the need to reduce barriers and costs in order to build more housing in California, where the median single-family home costs more than $820,000. Many also endorsed proposals to disincentivize private investment firms from buying up homes as well as a $25-billion bond proposed by former Sen. Bob Hertzberg to help first-time homebuyers afford a down payment.

“This really isn’t a debate because we’re agreeing so much with each other,” Hilton said at one point during the event.

Advertisement

That political alignment on one of the most pressing issues facing California may explain why voters are having such a difficult time deciding who to support.

A recent poll of the Public Policy Institute of California found that the five candidates topping the crowded field were within 4 percentage points of one another: Porter, Swalwell, Hilton, Democratic hedge fund founder Tom Steyer and Republican Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco. Earlier polls had Hilton and Bianco leading the field, though many voters remained undecided.

Some candidates took issue with Hicks’ push to cull the field, noting that most of the lower-polling candidates he asked to drop out are people of color.

“Our political system is rigged, corrupted by the political elites, the wealthy and well connected,” state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond, who is Black and Latino, said in a video posted on social media in response to the open letter. “The California Democratic Party is essentially telling every person of color in the race for Governor to drop out.”

Villaraigosa argued that enough voters remain undecided that it was too early for quality candidates to call it quits.

Advertisement

“Most people don’t even know who’s in the race,” said Villaraigosa. “It’s premature to be thinking about getting out of the race. I certainly am not considering it and I feel no pressure.”

Aside from the opinion polls, other indicators on who may emerge from the pack a candidates are slowly emerging.

Though it wasn’t enough to win the party’s endorsement, Swalwell won support from 24% of delegates at the state Democratic convention last month, the most of any party candidate.

While spending is no guarantee of success, Steyer has donated $47.4 million of his own wealth to his campaign. Mahan, who recently entered the race and is supported by Silicon Valley leaders, has quickly raised millions of dollars, as have two independent expenditures committees backing his bid.

Ashford said part of candidates’ decisions to remain in the race could have been driven by their lengthy political careers, as well as Democrats’ crushing November redistricting victory.

Advertisement

“In several cases, these are people who have won statewide office,” she said. “It’s tough to feel like there may not be a sequel to that.”

Nixon reported from Sacramento and Mehta from Los Angeles.

Continue Reading

Trending