AssangeDAO proceeds to fund lawsuit against U.S. Government

On his Telegram channel, @EWillHelpYou has announced, “The 50 million I helped insert became the funding for the current play in motion. In order to sue them, we needed strong financial backing. Legal teams had to be paid, etc.”

E announces lawsuit

According to a press release, which does not mention AssangeDAO or the lawsuit’s source of funding, plaintiffs include Margaret Ratner Kunstler and Deborah Hrbek, who are among members of Julian’s legal team and journalists who were illegally surveilled inside the Ecuadorian embassy. In particular, @Consortiumnews on Twitter reports that Assange’s U.S. lawyers are suing former CIA director Mike Pompeo and the Spanish private security firm Undercover Global Ltd (UC Global), which allegedly spied on Assange in the embassy. Details are to be announced from New York City via Zoom on Monday, August 15, at 11 AM EDT.

1 Like

He should tell the media that the 50 million funds came from Assange Dao.

1 Like

Exactly. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Awaiting Wau Holland’s update.

So far WH have not confirmed whether they have funded this legal action. Note that the monies for this action maybe coming from the Courage Foundation as per their twitter announcement and this PRESS CONFERENCE: Assange US Attorneys Sue Pompeo & Spanish Security Firm - Aug 15, 11am EDT - YouTube. .
https://twitter.com/couragefound/status/1558842632264105986
Edited 15/8/2022

Follow-up. During the press conference, which can be viewed at YouTube, there was no mention of AssangeDAO or any indication given of how the lawsuit is being funded. The legal complaint, demanding a jury trial, was filed on August 15, 2022 and has been posted online. The presser clarified a previous misleading announcement.

announcemen2

Whereas the plaintiffs personally believe that the U.S. Department of Justice should drop its charges against Assange, the lawsuit does not demand or request such action, as lead attorney Richard Roth explained. “Just so we’re clear, we’re not asking that the extradition proceeding be dropped,” said Roth. “The result of this litigation is not to drop it.”

Contemporaneously, Yahoo! News reported Roth as saying: “There should be sanctions, even up to dismissal of those charges, or withdrawal of an extradition request in response to these blatantly unconstitutional activities.” India’s NDTV attributed the same quotation to Roth’s co-counsel Robert Boyle. However, whichever lawyer made the statement, the remedies sought by the plaintiffs in this suit can be found at pages 12–13 of the complaint linked above, and do not include dismissal of DOJ charges or withdrawal of the extradition request.

Could be privately paid for or could be funded by Assange Defense - the campaign arm of the Courage Foundation.

Im pretty sure they are all hoping for an Ellsberg outcome no matter the formal declarations.

A question was asked at today’s presser about the Ellsberg precedent. In 1973, the judge dismissed all charges due to governmental misconduct and illegal evidence gathering that had, he wrote, “incurably infected the prosecution of this case.” Plaintiff Margaret Ratner Kunstler, one of Julian’s American lawyers, responded: “The issues here have not been raised by Julian Assange and cannot be raised by Julian Assange until he is here, until his trial begins, if he’s extradited. We can always raise it in our context as our rights were violated. There is no way for Julian to raise the violation of his rights at this time.”

They talked about the potential ripple effect - but yes we don’t wish for Assange to be extradited do we.

On his Telegram channel today during the press conference, @EWillHelpYou said he was “in it currently with the team.” I wish he had prompted one of the participants to mention that the funding for what he’d previously called “the current play in motion” came indirectly from AssangeDAO. That would have settled the uncertainty that you express, since you appear not to trust his original avowal.

It would be nice for this DAO to be more functional so that we could build a relationship with Wau Holland - so we could receive updates re Assange’s legal expenses in a direct and collaborative manner. (Im supposed to be on sabbatical - so thats all I have left to say about this.)

Today on his Telegram channel, @EWillHelpYou reported that SDNY judge John G. Koeltl has been assigned to the case. EWillHelpYou attached a screenshot from Koeltl’s Wikipedia bio showing he’d presided over a 2018 civil suit filed by the Democratic National Committee against the Russian Federation, WikiLeaks, and the Donald Trump presidential campaign alleging that Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. elections harmed Democrats. Koeltl dismissed the suit in 2019, describing WikiLeaks’ publishing activities as “plainly of the type entitled to the strongest protection that the First Amendment offers.”

I do not take risks, writes EWillHelpYou. We. Will. Win. If EWillHelpYou is insinuating that he somehow arranged for a sympathetic judge to be assigned, that is baloney. During the August 16, 2022 press conference discussed in this thread, attorney Robert Boyle said there are dozens of judges in SDNY. “When you file a lawsuit,” he explained, “it’s assigned to a particular judge on a random basis.” In the same Telegram post, EWillHelpYou also misrepresented this case as Assange v. CIA. Neither Julian nor WikiLeaks is a party to the subject litigation. It’s regrettable that someone so closely associated with AssangeDAO is spreading disinformation in social media.

For factual coverage - and the earliest updates I would suggest that DAO members follow this court reporter.

Judge Koetl - must be rather old - he served as an assistant special prosecutor for the Watergate Special Prosecution Force. He was nominated by Bill Clinton - when he was President.

1 Like

I can only verify what you say about judges being randomly assigned cases is absolutely true, as it is what happened to my case in the Seattle Federal Court.

i have been in some contact exchanging emails with Richard Roth and did not ask him until just now if you funded him. I will let you know IF he replies. He has replied three times to emails about my own personal suit and if he could take it. He said yes, if I , and i’ll paraphrase here, had 'hundreds of thousands of dollars". He said i could in fact, re-file a new Complaint in my case as it was dimissed ‘without prejudice’. I sent your member all the papers and they are here in a post somewhere. You gave me grief about the member here who was helping me being in prison, and I haven’t posted since. I dont see where there is anything to say, however, i will get back to you on this if and when Mr. Roth replies to my email. Long Live Assange! peace out.
oh yes, before i go, Mr. Roth’s Complaint against Pompeo and the CIA is here: DocumentCloud

1 Like

Its quite amazing that they can afford to sue the DOJ for 4th amendment violations, but they don’t bother to file a writ of habeas corpus to actually free Assange, given that they have stated that the charges against Assange are frivilous as a matter of law.

E is a pathological liar, and this has been well documented, he literally got sued for pretending to be someone else, and was forced to stop doing it by a court.

Wau Holland is not a legal organization, as in it doesn’t legally exist, they were forced to dissolve years ago, because they refused to report how they spent their money. I don’t think they will tell anyone how the money is being spent, being that they got shut down for not reporting how the money is being spent.

Ive tried to understand this but I keep thinking this is only possible once he is in full custody???

Ive tried to understand this but I keep thinking this is only possible once he is in full custody???

He is in the “custody or control” of the US, who is trying to extradite him.

He is still in the UK and may win his appeal against extradition.

lol, thats delusional.