OF THE
TIMES
"President Donald Trump is at the top of the list, and his prosecution will be pursued even after his term is over."
The Lyon-based organization [Interpol] told RIA Novosti if it receives a request to arrest Trump, its own rules will not allow it to act on it. Interpol acts as a liaison between law enforcement organizations in member states, helping them to collaborate with each other in solving crimes and arresting suspects trying to flee justice in a different jurisdiction.This is a smart ruse by the Ayatollah, assuming he colluded with the Trump administration to off a dangerous political rival.
Interpol maintains political neutrality and is barred by its charter from getting involved in activities of a political, military, religious, or racial nature, a spokesperson for the organization said.
"expands the [original] conspiracy to commit computer intrusion charge and accuses Assange of conspiring with "hackers" affiliated with "Anonymous," "LulzSec," "AntiSec," and "Gnosis."The computer crime charge is not limited to March 2010 anymore. It covers conduct that allegedly occurred between 2009 and 2015.
[*] Ferdinandusse has a first name but this will not be reported. The reason is that Ferdinandusse repeatedly shows his animus towards the defendant, Oleg Pulatov, by refusing to use the conventional honorific "Mister". This is so customary in Anglo-American court practice that the Dutch refusal to observe it makes a display of prejudice towards the defendant. That this is exceptional Ferdinandusse revealed himself as he read his script. Twice he read out the name as "Mr Pulatov" -- at Min. 53:37 and 55:35. Ferdinandusse had typed the honorific in his script, but read it out by mistake; this is the exception that proves his prejudice. Ferdinandusse's practice is also in violation of the Dutch criminal code requiring the defendant in an indictment and in trial to be considered innocent until proven guilty. In court Pulatov is as much a Mister as Steenhuis the judge.The trick the prosecution has asked the court to accept is that apart from the Ukrainian government's say-so, there is no chain of custody for the evidence of the weapon alleged to have been fired by the accused to destroy the aircraft and kill its occupants on July 17, 2014. If the Russian government says the Ukrainian government is lying, planting the evidence and fabricating the chain of custody, the prosecution has told the court to ignore the Russians - believe the Ukrainians. Presented in court last Friday, this chain of custody argument has transformed the trial into a Ukrainian war operation conducted by Dutch proxies, and mercenaries.
Comment: See also: