iTWire - DoJ, FBI 'pressuring British scribes to back Assange prosecution'

Thursday, 06 July 2023 12:51

DoJ, FBI 'pressuring British scribes to back Assange prosecution' Featured

Julian Assange is still stuck in a maximum-security prison. Image by hafteh7 from Pixabay

A British journalist who has, in the past, blown the whistle on WikiLeaks' own ethical lapses, claims the US Department of Justice and the FBI are leaning on his fellow scribes to back the prosecution of WikiLeaks founder and publisher Julian Assange.

In an op-ed written for the American website Rolling Stone, James Ball said he knew of these manoeuvres because he had also experienced the same treatment.

The American agencies were using vague threats and pressure tactics to try and achieve their aim, Ball said.

"I know because I am one of the British journalists being pressured to co-operate in the case against him, as someone who used to (briefly) work and live with him, and who went on to blow the whistle on WikiLeaks’ own ethical lapses," he explained.

In June, the Australian lost his first appeal against the order that aims to send him to the US for trial over alleged espionage charges.

Ball said the first bid to get him to co-operate came through the London Metropolitan Police in December 2021.

"On legal advice, I had stayed quiet about these attempts at the time," he said. "But now more journalists have told me that police have turned up on their doorsteps, too, in the last month.

"Those approached are former Guardian investigations editor David Leigh, transparency campaigner Heather Brooke, and the writer Andrew O’Hagan."

Ball said the first approach to him was through what he called "a deliberately innocuous email" from a Met officer who was on the special investigations team.

It read: “James, I would like to meet with you to ask if you would be willing to participate in a voluntary witness interview.

“You are not under investigation for anything. It is a delicate matter that I am only able to discuss with you face to face.”

He said he asked his lawyer to find out what the meeting would be about; the lawyer then told him that "the request related to Assange and WikiLeaks, and specifically related to a piece I had published on Assange’s relationship with a man called Israel Shamir".

Ball said Shamir, an apologist for Russian President Vladimir Putin and his allies, was able to obtain many of the US State Department cables published by WikiLeaks.

"He had been photographed leaving Belarus’ interior ministry shortly before its dictator Aleksandr Lukashenko claimed to have access to cables showing his opposition rivals were being funded by the US," Ball wrote.

He said he opposed the way this was handled and argued with Assange; later, he wrote an account of the incident for the Daily Beast in 2013.

Ball added: "But while I was more than willing to blow the whistle on this in the media, I do not believe it should be used to help a vindictive prosecution of Assange."

He said the US could not use any material from his article in court unless he testified to it. In the article, he mentioned that he had been the one to give the cables to Shamir on Assange's orders. And he said if he testified to it, then he could also be confronted with criminal charges.

Ball said his lawyer gave him details of the meeting. The police officer told him: "One thing that it might be helpful for your client to know in all of this … obviously, we’re working very closely with the Americans on all of this, and the three-letter-agencies [shorthand for the FBI/CIA/NSA etc.], and we’ve got a lot of information at our disposal.

“And given all of that, we thought your client should know that we know 'James Ball' doesn’t exist. I’m sure there are all sorts of possible legitimate reasons an investigative journalist would use an assumed identity, but it might be helpful for him to be aware we know this.”

Ball said this made him laugh, because his name was genuine and had been so since his birth.

"Did the FBI think they had something on me relating to a secret identity? They had certainly shown interest in me before — when former WikiLeaks volunteer Sigurdur Thordarson became an FBI informant and then turned coat again and told Rolling Stone what he’d told the FBI, he revealed I had been one of a handful of individuals the agency had asked him for intelligence about," he said.

Ball obtained legal advice from a number of lawyers, including a King's Counsel, all of whom warned him not to travel to the US, as it could open him up to "all sorts of possibilities that ranged from arrest to subpoena to absolutely no further action if the voluntary request was refused. And there would be no way to know".

Finally, when Ball said no after months of stalling, a DoJ prosecutor falsely accused him of giving cables to Shamir that contained material about Jews.

“Upon seeing those words from Shamir, I cannot help but ask whether Mr. Ball would reconsider his decision about speaking to the investigators, even if only just to respond to Shamir’s allegations," the DoJ prosecutor wrote.

But Ball did not bite. He said he had broken his silence because there was now a need to visit the US for work. Additionally, the US agencies had started contacting other journalists.

"A few weeks ago, two Metropolitan Police officers visited the homes of three journalists who had worked with Julian Assange — transparency campaigner Brooke, former Guardian investigations editor Leigh, and the writer (and would-be Assange biographer) O’Hagan," Ball wrote.

"Brooke told me she was surprised at home (she had a guest at the time) by the two officers, and spoke to them briefly outside her front door. She noted to me that they were 'almost aggressively friendly and passive', making it clear they were seeking a voluntary witness statement on behalf of the FBI, and she was 'under no obligation' to provide it."

Ball pointed out that Brooke was a dual US-UK citizen who was born in America. She lived in London but often travelled back to America.

"She said to me, only half-jokingly, that she was quite glad that I 'could be her guinea pig' to see if it was safe to travel to the US, given that I was travelling before she was due to do so," he said.

Ball said Leigh had been in Scotland when the Americans visited his house and found a letter at his London flat when he returned.

It said: “We have been contacted recently by officers from the Federal Bureau of Investigations in Washington DC (FBI) who would like to speak to you. The FBI would like to discuss your experiences with Assange/WikiLeaks as referenced in WikiLeaks: Inside Julian Assange’s War on Secrecy.

“I must stress this is purely voluntary and you are acting as a witness only. Therefore there is no requirement to speak to the FBI if you do not wish to.”

Ball said all three journalists had made it clear they would not provide witness statements for the Assange prosecution.

"O’Hagan has publicly condemned the Metropolitan Police, calling their co-operation with the FBI 'shameful'," he said

"He [O'Hagan] said in a statement, 'I don’t support the efforts of governments to silence journalists, or to bring charges against writers, editors, or organisations for publishing the truth … I would happily go to jail myself before helping the FBI'.”

Ball said these requests may seem very gentle. "The 'voluntary' request I received, though, prompted my expensive UK lawyers — people I have known for years, not vultures bilking me for money I don’t have — to have me consult even more senior UK lawyers and then American counsel too," he added.

"In other words, I wasn’t the only one worried about the 'voluntary' request I had received. Serious lawyers on both sides of the Atlantic agreed. I am not an American citizen, and I don’t currently live in the US — but I write about the US and I do it for US outlets."

Ball said for two years he had not visited the US on legal advice and this had prevented him from writing stories for American outlets.

"I had a real and credible fear of prosecution," he explained. "As Brooke’s reply to me showed, she did too — even with less sabre-rattling."

Ball said if US President Joe Biden wanted the DoJ to backflip on the [Barack] Obama DoJ's decision on prosecuting Assange, Biden should at least explain it, and say why it was worth the silencing effect it was having on mainstream journalism."

The Obama DoJ decided it could not prosecute Assange without threatening US journalists and their First Amendment protections.

"As it stands, Biden’s DoJ is threatening the US media’s First Amendment rights, even as it claims to be standing up to a Supreme Court that is threatening many other rights. The hypocrisy should not stand," Ball concluded.

Read 41 times

GARTNER MARKET GUIDE FOR NDR 2022

DOWNLOAD NOW!

PROMOTE YOUR WEBINAR ON ITWIRE

MORE INFO HERE!