#461 Chamira Gamage on Potential Pardon for Julian Assange

Chamira Gamage is a Philanthropy Manager at Amnesty International and cofounder at Thinkrs.io. In this conversation, we discuss Julian Assange’s story, freedom of the press, why he was arrested, the potential issues with his case, how a pardon would work, and what the potential outcome will be. ======================= Crypto.com is the only all-in-one platform that allows you to BUY / SELL / STORE / EARN / LOAN / INVEST crypto all from one place. Join over 1 million users currently using the Crypto.com app. Download and earn $50 USD using my code ‘pomp2020’, or use the link https://platinum.crypto.com/r/pomp2020 when you sign up for one of their metal cards today. ======================= Coinbase Wallets are adding support for .crypto and .zil domains through their partnership with Unstoppable Domains. Unstoppable Domains provides an all-in-one solution for blockchain domains. You can send money using these new domains instead of long Bitcoin wallet addresses, while also storing your domain in Coinbase's collectibles section. Go to unstoppabledomains.com in the dapp browser to register and manage your domains. ======================= LVL is a new crypto investing platform that I'm an investor in. They allow anyone to trade an unlimited number of times per month for free. They have no trading fees and no spreads in the spot market. If you buy or sell more than $500 in Bitcoin on any exchange, you're spending too much on trading fees. Use LVL to save money and trade as many times you want. https://lvl.co/pomp

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:02Anthony Pompliano?

  What's up everyone? This is Anthony Pompliano. Most of you know me as Pomp. You're listening to the Pomp Podcast, simply the best podcast out there. Let's kick this thing off. Shamira Gamaj is a philanthropy manager at Amnesty International and a co-founder at thinkrs.io. In this conversation, we discuss Julian Assange's story, freedom of the press, why Julian was arrested, the potential issues with this case, how a pardon would work, and what the potential outcome will be. I really enjoyed this conversation with Shamira, and I hope you do as well. Before we get into this episode, though, I want to quickly talk about our sponsors. First up is Unstoppable Domains. Everyone's tried

• 0:44Anthony Pompliano?

  to send a Bitcoin transaction where you've got to send the Bitcoin to a random string of letters and numbers that serves as a wallet address, while Unstoppable Domains is solving that problem in partnership with Coinbase Wallets. Coinbase Wallet has now added support for .crypto domains. Unstoppable Domains provides that all-in-one solution for those blockchain domains. So you can go to unstoppabledomains.com and you can buy any .crypto domain. I have pomp.crypto. You can go buy your name, your company name, or a phrase you like. Once you buy it, no one else has it. You can then tell somebody, "Hey, don't send me Bitcoin to my Bitcoin wallet address. Instead, send it to pomp.crypto and it'll come right to

• 1:26Anthony Pompliano?

  your wallet." So head on over to unstoppabledomains.com and buy your .crypto domain today. Just like regular .com domains, once somebody else buys that name, it's no longer available for anyone else to purchase it. So whether it's your name, your company name, or a phrase you like, go to unstoppabledomains.com and make sure you pick up your .crypto domain before somebody else. Unstoppabledomains.com. I'm a big fan, and you will be too if you go use unstoppabledomains.com. Next up is crypto.com. They're an all-in-one platform that allows you to buy, sell, store, earn, loan, or invest crypto all from one place. They've got over 1 million users currently using the crypto.com app. Crypto.com, not only is it a fantastic URL, but it's the

• 2:11Anthony Pompliano?

  place where mass adoption is occurring. So head on over to crypto.com, the all-in-one platform that allows you to buy, sell, store, earn, loan, or invest crypto all from one single place. Crypto.com. Mass adoption is happening at crypto.com.

• 2:29Anthony Pompliano?

  Lastly is Level, LVL. They're a new crypto investing platform that I'm an investor in. They allow anyone to trade an unlimited number of times per month for free. That's right. They are a free crypto exchange. They have no trading fees and no spreads in the spot market. They make money through other products and services, so the exchange is completely free. No hidden fees, no trading fees, no spreads. If you buy or sell Bitcoin on any exchange, you're spending too much money on trading fees. So head on over to Level, LVL, to save money and trade as many times as you want.

• 3:07Anthony Pompliano?

  LVL.co/pomp. Again, LVL.co/pomp. Level, a new crypto investing platform that is completely free. LVL.co/pomp. Go check it out. All right, let's get this episode with Chimera. I think you guys will really enjoy this one.

• 3:29Speaker 01

  Anthony Pompliano is a partner at Morgan Creek Digital. All opinions expressed by Pomp or his guests on this podcast are solely their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of Morgan Creek Digital or Morgan Creek Capital Management. You should not treat any opinion expressed by Pomp as a specific inducement to make a particular investment or follow a particular strategy, but only as an expression of his opinion. This podcast is for informational purposes only.

• 4:00Anthony Pompliano?

  All right, guys. Bang, bang. I'm super excited for this episode. I've got Chimera here. Thank you so much for doing this, sir.

• 4:07Speaker 02

  My pleasure, man. Very happy to be here.

• 4:09Anthony Pompliano?

  Absolutely. You obviously have an accent. You're living in Australia right now. Let's go back, though, before we get to all the fun stuff. Who are you? Where'd you grow up? And kind of what's your background before you get to Amnesty International?

• 4:22Speaker 02

  Yeah, absolutely, man. So yeah, as you said, definitely a strong Aussie accent. I've born and raised in Australia and working at Amnesty International at the moment. My background in general has been, I did a human rights law degree at university, which certainly put me on the path for, you know, getting involved further in human rights and the international space, I would say, in general, with a little bit of politics, international relations thrown in. And then I had a big focus being like a relationship management in recruitment. Did that for many years and was a little bit unfulfilled towards the end. And I was looking for a way to connect my sort of passions and areas

• 5:06Speaker 02

  of interest and skills. And it led me to Amnesty International, which was obviously, you know, it's a huge international organisation, working on all the causes that I care about, some in particular, I would say. And it led me to where I am today.

• 5:23Anthony Pompliano?

  What is Amnesty International for those that don't know?

• 5:26Speaker 02

  Amnesty is the, it's the largest human rights organisation in the world. It's been around since 1961, started by a human rights lawyer named Peter Benenson, who was basically raising a toast to freedom and wanted to ensure that people around the world could, you know, condemn any acts that jeopardised human rights that took place around the world by sending letters predominantly. From there, Amnesty's grown to 150 countries, just over 10 million supporters around the world, and has grown in influence with governments, with people, speaking up for people who don't, who can't amplify their concerns or have

• 6:08Speaker 02

  been mistreated around the world. They generally look to Amnesty as a bit of an independent pillar to stand up for human rights and protect them.

• 6:18Anthony Pompliano?

  One of the cases that you've been involved in is the Julian Assange kind of story. And this goes back many years. People who are listening to this, some of them will be experts on the details and some will be beginners. Maybe just walk us through, who is Julian Assange? And why has his story become so publicly known? And has so many people kind of paying attention?

• 6:40Speaker 02

  Absolutely. So as we were saying earlier, you know, it's, it's, it's one of the most complicated cases. And backstory is certainly important. And I think putting it all together in an easy to digest way is super important for people to actually understand why it's important. Particularly a week from what I would say is one of the biggest trials and verdicts of our time. In terms of his backstory, Julian is a publisher. Julian is journalist. He basically performed activities that many journalists perform today and have for a very long time, which is receiving information from different sources and then publishing it on a platform which he created,

• 7:21Speaker 02

  which I believe started in about 2006 called WikiLeaks, which many people would have heard of. Now, the role that WikiLeaks played in broader society and particularly in the media journalism space has been pretty profound. What he did basically was, in a sense, you know, publish information directly, straight from the horse's mouth, I would say. So that it basically got around any inherent biases that took place when reporting from journalists or media orgs, which, you know, like any organization, plenty of pros and cons. But certainly there can be vested interests, there can be inherent bias, there can be slants put in, in the reporting of information.

• 8:04Speaker 02

  And once again, information is the grounding for which we all make our judgments on the world, how we think, how we vote ultimately. So for that to be as transparent and, and, you know, clear as possible, the more raw the information, the better. Obviously, keeping in line with national security, not putting anyone at risk, etc. So with that in mind, WikiLeaks published information, including emails, you know, and, and various reports that they believed were in the public interest, which makes us more informed today. And so. His background was predominantly publishing his his experience prior to that, I believe, was in

• 8:46Speaker 02

  tech and software and IT. That's certainly what shaped his, yeah, his career.

• 8:53Anthony Pompliano?

  And so obviously WikiLeaks has become, you know, a known quantity on an international stage. There's a lot of sensitive information. Some would argue confidential. Some would argue is important for the public light and kind of public conversation. What is the type of content? Like, are there specific examples that stick out into your head that were kind of milestone type publishing or leaks that WikiLeaks posted so people can get a sense of what that content is?

• 9:21Speaker 02

  Absolutely. I think the ones that stood out the most and the ones that are referred to the most, you know, in general are the Iraq War Logs is what they were called. In 2010, there was, there was a release of many cables, as they were called, and also a video in particular, which many people may be aware of, of the Apache helicopter and gunning down civilians, including reporters themselves. And the nature that it was done and the sort of crassness in how that that action was performed was was shocking to people around the world. A lot of people suspect this takes place in wars and, you know, it is a war and no one gets to really see the

• 10:05Speaker 02

  the details unless you're on the ground. And I think we're kind of covered here in the in the West. And I think that for many people was the was the sort of anchor for, wow, you know, that's good to know. I didn't know that this was being performed in our names as the public. The Guantanamo Bay prisoner files as well as to how they were being treated. 2007, I believe, was another big one, which which shaped people's perceptions. There was a lot of emails regarding the DNC in America, treatment of of Bernie Sanders,

• 10:41Speaker 02

  and the voting within the party itself and conversations that took place. So I won't get into the absolute details, but yeah, it's certainly revealed. Aspects of, you know, governments and institutions that we place a lot of trust in and and made it a lot clearer as to how they act on on a on a regular basis. And that's really important for us again to make our mind up to be informed citizens and and know what what what world we're operating and and sort of playing in, yeah.

• 11:13Anthony Pompliano?

  Yeah, and I think part of it was like one half of the population was surprised by all of this and frankly shocked. And then another half had just confirmed what their, you know, greatest fears or or kind of the conspiracy type viewpoint was, right? It was just like, hey, I always thought this happened, but like, okay, now there's proof. So it really, you know, pulled a lot of folks in. And then obviously those that are in powerful positions or positions of influence. This wasn't exactly the type of information that they wanted to be publicly exposed. You know, in a bunch of different forms and factions. So Julian Assange, doing journalistic work today has been arrested in the United States. There is the belief that there's the freedom of press.

• 11:54Anthony Pompliano?

  There's a lot of nuance. There's a lot of legal precedent that shapes that view in the United States. How do we get from the publication of confidential or sensitive information via WikiLeaks in a journalistic type perspective to him sitting behind bars today? Like, what is that path? And maybe talk through a little bit in terms of Julian's perspective and then those who might disagree with his perspective.

• 12:24Speaker 02

  Fair enough. Yeah, um, it's been a bit of a long road, I would say. A lot of factors have come to play and all which kind of need unpacking in their own way. So after the war logs, he was actually in Sweden, and this is quite a controversial, you know, aspect as well, which which kind of framed how he was perceived publicly. But you know, my understanding is there were allegations of rape charges in Sweden, which he faced up to in terms of a an online hearing or an on, it was like one of the first. First extradition processes that he had to go through. Charges were dropped and and the case was was dropped.

• 13:08Speaker 02

  It was reopened in future, I think many years later. Due due to some encouragement. But during that time, he felt that. There was a concerted effort. To get him to to.

• 13:21Speaker 02

  You know, to the US, that ultimately, based on his actions and publications, the US. Will want to get him and and that that that's fairly logical that obviously, you know. I can't imagine them wanting to just let the guy sit, so. You know, um, they they um. There was a connection there with London as well, so to try and get him to. Face up in London and exactly the scenario that's taking place now, which is actually an extradition treaty between the US and and the UK. For him to be. Trialled in in London and the UK and then be sent to the to the US. The nature of what that would look like wasn't clear, but that was the general suspicion. So he was actually treated as. An asylum seeker, which is which is not the term you'd normally think of with with.

• 14:06Speaker 02

  With this instance, but there were many countries that that felt that he's he was being chased after. You know, and and for the wrong reasons and that it was unjust. And so a number of countries around the world offered him asylum or refuge. And Ecuador being one of them, so whilst being in London, the Ecuadorian embassy. In London granted him. That refuge. And so he spent a lot of time there, I believe it was. You know, seven to eight years he spent. In in Ecuador. With them saying, you are a persecuted individual. We recognize your actions and the treatment. That that that you've.

• 14:49Speaker 02

  You know, experienced and that there's a general consensus that the US will want to get you and and mislead you further. You know, to to kind of narrow it down, so he spent a lot of time there, he was still performing WikiLeaks actions whilst in the embassy. And you know, from the US and UK perspective, I can imagine that would be, you know, particularly when he would be revealing actions that they were purporting, I can imagine they wouldn't be too happy and would still be trying to get him to, let's say, face the music based on their own terms, whether it was right or wrong. And as an international community, as a human rights organization with Amnesty, there was certainly an acknowledgement that that was that was wrong, that was breaking a number of human rights laws, and that it would set

• 15:34Speaker 02

  a really bad precedent for future journalists, you know, and publishers around the world who wanted to perform similar actions in the public's interest, and that he was being used as a scapegoat. Now, that has come to be, so last year would probably be one of the most important years in this whole story and unfolding because he was literally given up, I would say, by the Ecuadorian embassy and then physically dragged out and taken to Belmarsh Prison in London.

• 16:09Anthony Pompliano?

  Okay, before before we continue, I want to clarify a couple of things. So Julian Assange is in London, feels like kind of the walls are closing in around him, he is likely to continue to face legal obstacles, potentially arrest. There's all kinds of allegations that are levied against him. I don't want to go into whether they are guilty, not guilty, the courts around the world will figure that stuff out. But there was definitely allegations. Some of them were not that, you know, shocking or damning, and some of them were really, really bad, right? And so there's a whole spectrum there. But at some point, he realizes, I need

• 16:50Anthony Pompliano?

  to find asylum with a country that is willing to treat me like a refuge. Talk through, and so what he ultimately does is he literally walks into the Ecuadorian embassy in London and stays there for years and kind of has this refuge. Talk through, what does asylum mean? Like, when somebody is looking for asylum, just at a high level, for those that don't understand it, when he walks into that door, why is he safe, even though he is technically in the city of London, but he is now in an Ecuadorian building and how that works?

• 17:23Speaker 02

  Yeah, absolutely. I mean, in terms of asylum, it's, you know, it's basically an unfounded fear of persecution based on a number of factors. It could be religious, it could be, you know, your sexuality, it could be, you know, a variety. And basically, if anyone falls under those factors, they're considered a refugee and should be granted asylum. I don't know the absolute specifics of that instance and how it was defined, but they did consider that he was a political prisoner and somebody whose life was at risk from governments based on actions he performed, they believed weren't illegal whatsoever. And this also kind of fell into the narrative of Assange being a hacker, which, you know, which was a part

• 18:08Speaker 02

  of the trial that he's facing at the moment, where there has been no proof whatsoever that that's the case. And again, it's another word that you can, you know, slap onto someone as a label and it just kind of sticks. And then there's no second thought. But yeah, so without him being a hacker, there was certainly grounds to say that he was being persecuted. And so asylum, it's basically an entity of the Ecuadorian state in London, and he's based on international law protections. He is allowed to reside there and not be touched, I would suppose, unless there was extenuating circumstances where that embassy decided, you know what, we're going to cancel this refuge regardless of how that internationally

• 18:52Speaker 02

  plays between us and other countries. Because there were staunch advocates of him being protected, and I believe there was a change in government in Ecuador. I believe Carrera, I think, was the initial leader that granted him asylum. And as there was a change in future, there was also a bit of a change of tone towards the end of that, so coming up to last year, where there were a number of reports of Assange's activities taking place in the embassy itself that they felt weren't appropriate, and they decided to give him up, let's say. There was a hefty loan given to Ecuador not long after that took place as well in the

• 19:36Speaker 02

  billion. So that's an interesting one to look into. But that aside, um, yeah, there was a lot of activities that also took place, just to clarify, within the embassy, such as spying. So there was spying of all the guests that came into the embassy in the bathrooms. There was spying on his legal proceedings, which in many countries, if that took place, it'd be like, see you later. That's it. You know, we're not going to continue this. That was considered recently and taken into account, which was good, but again, shouldn't have happened. So it was quite an interesting space going on there. There was reports of bugging, plenty of evidence, even whistleblowers that worked there said that there was a lot of things going on that just wasn't appropriate. So it was quite an interesting time towards the end. And then he was given up to London, who took him into.

• 20:20Anthony Pompliano?

  So while he's got the, um, uh, kind of the asylum, he's there, he's protected for a number of years. What stopped the London police, the FBI, you know, pretty much anyone with big guns and a lot of men from kicking down the door and just going and taking them? Like, what is the, uh, the reason why they don't do that? Is it a respect for international law? Or is it something else? Is it that Ecuador will literally shoot guns from armed guards to protect the embassy? Like, how does that work?

• 20:48Speaker 02

  Yeah, it is, though. It is respect for international law, which, um, a lot of countries kind of play with to their own advantage, to be honest, but it's more of like an international consensus and agreement. So, um, you know, there are, there are conventions, the Refugee Convention, for example, the Rights of Child, like there are a variety that countries subscribe to, um, you know, uh, and, and they have to sort of, sort of stick to it. But there has been instances of countries that just kind of skirt around at different times to suit their own agendas. Um, in this instance, it would be that. I think it would be just far too blatant to come in storming. As I mentioned, it's been a very long process where, um, you know, the, the action, the right actions had to kind of, um, play out at the

• 21:32Speaker 02

  right time. It's not like you could just go in really nearly storm the place. It would be a huge breach. And I don't think, um, you know.

• 21:40Speaker 02

  In my own mind, sort of guessing how it would work. I don't think the US would think that it would be worth for a case like this to go that far because of how they would be perceived on an international scale.

• 21:51Speaker 02

  So yeah, it's really to keep the peace more than anything and adhere to those international human rights standards. So that, yeah, I think, like I said, they pick and choose the case to kind of skirt around.

• 22:04Anthony Pompliano?

  And so at some point, Julian Assange is doing whatever he's doing inside of the building. Again, there's a bunch of debate, good, bad, indifferent. Then the Ecuadorian government, there's this change of power. But we eventually get to the point where Ecuador now says, you know what, you no longer are going to have this asylum. And my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong here, is like, they literally just call the London police and they're like, come get him. Like literally, we're just gonna open the front door and like, come drag him out. Is that, is that what happens?

• 22:34Speaker 02

  Correct. Yeah, that was pretty much how it was pretty, at that point, it was pretty brash and in your face, I suppose. But that's where the famous shot up, a lot of people would have seen came from with him kind of being dragged out like with a beard. As you can tell, he has probably hasn't been living in the best conditions and put into a van and then just quite simply taken away for further hearings and then put into Belmarsh. And just to clarify, Belmarsh is one of the worst prisons in England. Anyone you talk to says, you know, it's, it's extremely rough. And the fact that someone,

• 23:09Speaker 02

  Assange and the actions he's performed is in Belmarsh is just so outlandish and ridiculous that it's a statement in itself. So.

• 23:20Anthony Pompliano?

  Yeah. And, and when he gets arrested, and I'll kind of put that in air quotes because I don't know if that's actually how they've, you know, labeled this. But when that occurs, what are the charges against him? Are these new charges? Are these simply the application of previous allegations against him? How does he kind of end up behind bars? What's the rationale there?

• 23:43Speaker 02

  Yeah, the rationale is, um, so there was a number of things. So with the trial itself, um, they were, one of the biggest focus points was what I mentioned before about hacking and whether he was conspiring to hack information. So for example, Chelsea Manning was, was obviously, many people would know was a whistleblower that passed on from the inside many documents, which WikiLeaks then published again in action that New York Times, you know, many other papers would do. Um, but, but to get him on that sort of technicality was, did he conspire to hack this information? Did he conspire to say, look, I will help you hack this. I will illegally ascertain this information. And again, from the case notes that I've seen and not many people have seen,

• 24:27Speaker 02

  there doesn't seem to be any evidence of that. Another one was that he skipped bail in London. So that was another technicality. And again, you know, um, this kind of all falls into the context of there was a genuine fear that the exact scenario that's playing out right now was going to happen. And people said, that's ridiculous. You know, you've got to face up, et cetera, et cetera. And, um, yeah, there's certainly a legal process that has to take place. But all those fears, uh, you know, have, have come to fruition. Um, and, and to add on to that was whether anyone was harmed from, from his releases. So did anyone, um, you know, get physically harmed from their names being revealed in any publications, which also ties into them,

• 25:11Speaker 02

  um, questioning from a lot of people about how he isn't a journalist because he didn't retract names. Um, we've seen more than enough evidence. I think a week ago, there was an hour long chat between him and the government saying, look, I've just been up till four AM deleting as many names as I possibly can. Many witnesses have proven that Guardian Journos as well, saying, no, he literally didn't sleep to make sure there were no names involved, that no one was implicated. And again, we're talking millions of cables. So you do the absolute best you possibly can, whilst balancing the story that you're trying to put forward. So, um, yeah, again, I haven't seen any evidence, evidence of that, um, throughout this trial, but they were the main points.

• 25:51Anthony Pompliano?

  Got it. And so what is the difference between what Julian Assange did and let's say the New York Times, Washington Post, you know, organizations that people consider mainstream media that, you know, conduct journalism and most people would think that if there is confidential or sensitive information that they got their hands on, they would publish and they would tell the stories and kind of hold people of power, influence or organizations accountable. What is the difference between Assange and any of those organizations?

• 26:21Speaker 02

  Well, it's a really good question. You know, and this is probably the best way to to ground this whole, this whole conversation is, you know, Obama had the opportunity to prosecute Assange and he said, I can't. And many people are asking, you know, why? And it was called the New York Times problem or predicament because he said, if I prosecuted Julian Assange, I would then have to prosecute the New York Times because so many of these papers perform the exact same function. If he is quite simply a publisher, not even in the US, he's not even in the country. And he's just, he's like a middleman really is just revealing information for people to consume.

• 27:03Speaker 02

  There actually isn't any difference, to be honest. And I think there are certainly journalists that think that, you know, the way he, he went about publishing information didn't make him a journalist. And now we're getting into the technicalities of an industry where certain players might think one thing culturally, the others might think, no, that's, that's a good culture. That's a bad culture. So top line overall, like there wasn't any dispute, which also has had to be proven and chipped away at over time to unpack the stereotype and stigma that was put forward by the media. Funnily enough, that, that also made so many stories off the back of WikiLeaks publications. We have to remember. So they've profited, they've, they've gotten plenty of clicks and readers from,

• 27:45Speaker 02

  from a lot of WikiLeaks stories, but then when the tide shifted, one of, one of the first to kind of to shift and turn their back on Assange. And again, I completely acknowledge it's an extremely complicated case. It's not black and white, like, like many things aren't black and white. There's a lot of space in the gray that has to be unpacked to truly understand. So I think with, with this instance,

• 28:09Speaker 02

  There's enough evidence to say he absolutely is a journalist, the same as many different publications. And the manner in which he went about it could be the slight difference, which for me is a cultural thing of an industry.

• 28:22Anthony Pompliano?

  Would there have been a difference if, let's say, Julian Assange simply said, hey, I've built a website. If you have confidential sensitive information that you would like to leak, upload it. I'm actually not going to look at it and it's just going to auto publish. In some way, he now isn't taking like, quote unquote, editorial control or, you know, redacting names and kind of there's a whole bunch of downsides to that model. But would that have been less risky for him? Like, would he basically have been able to insulate himself from some of the pressures and ultimately the arrest? By simply just saying, hey, I built a website and anyone can use it, but I don't actually say publish this, you know, don't publish that.

• 29:04Speaker 02

  Yeah, that's a good question. As far as I'm aware, I mean, I understand, I mean, WikiLeaks is a website. And, you know, they also were one of the first to have a Dropbox that whistleblowers or anyone could just put information into. So if you didn't feel comfortable passing this on to other organizations or other parties, you could literally put it into the Dropbox, WikiLeaks would ascertain it, protect your identity and then publish. But as far as I understand, it was quite similar to that, I think. I don't know if he was called an editor per se, but certainly the sort of figurehead of this, of this, you know, you could call it a publication because it was compiling information and then just putting it out there through their own, through their own channels.

• 29:48Speaker 02

  And, and again, it was very much, you know, in line with the internet's culture at the time, I suppose, which is, we've got this big chunk of data, this big chunk of information, we're going to put it out there and you can sift through it in your own time. So, you know, and that's probably where that, like I mentioned before, that sort of conversation of, oh, is that a journalistic practice? But once again, to be honest, I was way more informed and many people were more informed, reading it directly rather than reading someone's interpretation. So I think it was quite similar, to be honest, yeah.

• 30:21Anthony Pompliano?

  And to be clear, normally if somebody had taken that information and not sent it to Julian Assange on WikiLeaks, they had sent it to the New York Times, Washington Post, whatever.

• 30:32Anthony Pompliano?

  Some of it would be quote unquote verified, right? But once that had been done, they basically would reveal the same information. They just might write their own story and then insert their own opinions or facts or details, you know, not necessarily quote unquote fake news, but just they would tell a story around the information. They would never just dump it in terms of, hey, come and read it. But I think what you're getting at here is like, is actually just revealing the source materials a better journalistic practice because now it allows the reader to make up their own mind after reading the content rather than having to rely on the journalist or the organization to be that filter that basically tells the story and can use data or information to weave into a story

• 31:15Anthony Pompliano?

  to craft a narrative versus just seeing the actual information for yourself, right?

• 31:19Speaker 02

  Yeah, correct. And look, I think, you know, again, there's that, there's that nuance and the gray aspect of journalism because I mean, it's a fantastic profession. It's extremely valuable. I was looking to be a journalist when I was younger as well, you know, and I really thought that it was such, it plays such an important role in society and it absolutely does. And journalism takes many forms. You know, there's a lot of value in reading the source material if you want to be informed than an issue. But then what about the 10 to 20 different forms of journalism that give you like, you know, a nice little blog or a narrative or a backstory to something or an opinion piece like, like everything, pros and cons. But when it comes to certain types of information,

• 32:01Speaker 02

  that source material, when it's uncompromised and it's just again, straight from the horse's mouth, I feel makes you more informed. And there are some issues that probably shouldn't really be, you know, shouldn't really go through that filter because they're the issues that are really important for you to know before you vote or make your mind up about the world around you. And yeah, so I think that, you know, there's, it takes many forms, definitely pros and cons and benefits to each side, but having that source material is just invaluable.

• 32:33Anthony Pompliano?

  So let's talk about moving forward. Julian Assange is currently under arrest. I believe there's an extradition interest. I don't know if that's like a request or whatever, but basically the United States would like to bring him to the United States. It sounds like there's some legal proceedings that need to play out to find if that will happen or not. But kind of where do we go from here? Maybe like, what's the risk scenario? And then what is kind of the positive perspective of where we go from here?

• 33:02Speaker 02

  Yeah, sure. So yeah, as you mentioned, so it is an extradition extradition hearings. There's a treaty between the US and the UK. And it basically says, you know, if the US requests to extradite someone to the US for whatever grounds, that's fine, because it has to go through a court process. However, the caveat is that if they if they believe there's a political, there's inherently a political nature to this trial, then it gets scrapped. And so again, from my perspective and many people's perspectives that have been viewing this case for years, and this particular trial, there's certainly evidence that it's political in nature, like, you know, and I think a lot of people can feel that in their guts, they kind of know. And I think that's a big thing about this case.

• 33:45Speaker 02

  A lot of people kind of know, it just hasn't been that discussion in the public or information to kind of really go, yeah, okay, okay, fair enough. Now it makes sense. But I think we're coming to that. So where we're at now is a massive crossroads. Where we're at is a week out from the 4th of Jan, which is the verdict of this trial, which has been going since February. Now, I'll just unpack this a little bit. So, so a week out, the options on the table are with Trump's last term, you know, last time in play now, he could pardon him. And a lot of people are calling for a pardon. That's one way to to release Julian. And just to remember, he's being extradited to the US so that he would

• 34:30Speaker 02

  face the espionage charges, which is the first time in 102 years. So I think the first time ever, the US has actually placed these these big espionage charges on a journalist. And he's facing up to 175 years. If that was to take place. So we all kind of know where that's going to go. Now, he's facing twenty three hours a day solitary confinement, one hour out. It's horrendous, right? Aside from being in Belmarsh, aside from not being given warm clothes in the freezing colds in London. And, you know, I think a lot of people can see that his treatment in there is just, is really bad. He's got a lung condition. So with everything going on with COVID, I know that the risks were even higher.

• 35:12Speaker 02

  And there wasn't any special treatment or anything like that to acknowledge that. So he's in a pretty dire situation. All the people I've spoken to that have seen him, spoken to him have said, mate, this is dire. There's not that much time left, to be frank, and, you know, it's really not looking good. He's got a lovely partner Stella. He's been working with Amnesty and speaking to recently, who's just like, you know, and they're two kids, young kids, who barely get to see him as well, who are just doing absolutely everything they can to try and ensure that his health is kept more than anything. And that's really dire. So we really hope that he can keep up, you know, the strength and move forward there. And that's what we're all trying to do.

• 35:52Speaker 02

  Now, if the pardon takes place, that's huge. It's a really tough one. Trump's, you know, here, it's a shot in the dark. It's really hard to know. When it comes to, you know, Biden, let's say that he is extradited on the fourth. That's the verdict. I've been told that this could be a long, lengthy process for twelve to eighteen months afterwards. If it's, if there's an appeal.

• 36:16Speaker 02

  And so a lot of people don't think he'll last that long. You know, and then if the charges were to be dropped by Biden after the fourth, I think that could be one other avenue. But that's also a bit of a tough one. So I think the more discussions that can be have, that can be had with his part, his team, the better. There's been people in the Democratic Party, like AOC's expressed concern. You know, there's people on the Republican Party, like, you know, there's Ron Paul, Rand Paul. There are people from all sides. In the last year, I've watched this as Amnesty has become even more sort of prevalent. I've really noticed, talking to different parties, how much this is just not a nonpartisan issue anymore.

• 37:00Speaker 02

  It's just not nonpartisan. It's literally one of those things where everyone can kind of come together and go, this is pretty messed up. Freedom of speech, freedom of expression, you know, the freedom of the press. They're all kind of on the line with a case like this. Everyone's looking for that one thing that unites us. Biden talks about uniting the population. Trump wants to unite the population. Sure, you know, these are the things that politicians say, there is no better example than this. And it is one of the most important things for the population to be informed, to hold on to these democratic principles that we espouse to the world and hold on to tightly. So I think this is the kind of thing that we should all fight for. I've been fighting for this for a long time and watched people who were not even remotely

• 37:45Speaker 02

  concerned in the last year or two slowly, slowly changed their changed their tune, changed their tune. And in the last week, we saw Sarah Palin apologize. You know, I've seen a number, a New York Times journalist apologized for statements he's made about him. This is crucial, they said, we know where this stands. Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, who I've been speaking to, a really good guy. And he was very gracious in saying, look, I made comments in 2011. I changed my mind this week. This is so important for everyone. And I think that's what I'm trying to convey more than anything is that these are the options on the table. This is why it's important. And we really need to speak up and make our voices heard now because that actually can, after watching it happen, working at Amnesty, that can make a difference here.

• 38:31Anthony Pompliano?

  Absolutely. And one thing that's interesting to me, and even I've done it, is Julian Assange and Edward Snowden, I think both are different cases, different details, different facts. But many people kind of put them in the bucket of these are folks who held the powerful, the influential accountable. They did it in different ways. You know, they kind of had their different paths, like I said, but is there a world where an outgoing Trump basically says, you know what, this is a way to make a statement and I'm going to not just pardon Assange, I'm actually going to pardon Assange and Snowden and maybe others

• 39:10Anthony Pompliano?

  and kind of, you know, make that pushback when it comes to freedom of the press and the way that both of those individuals have been treated. Is that something that's part of the conversation? Or is it really just, hey, Assange is the one that's likely to get pardoned if anyone does. And so let's focus the energy there.

• 39:31Speaker 02

  Yeah, uh, yeah, really good question. I mean, I think, uh, looking at history and I've been looking at this recently to kind of see if there are any patterns. But, uh, you know, a lot of governments, um, sorry, a lot of presidents do like to, to pardon people that they, they genuinely have always wanted to in the last minutes. It's kind of like their last, um, chance to add to their legacy. Uh, as to what kind of a president they were and probably help out a few mates, I would imagine. Um, so, um, with all of that in mind, um, I think Obama did pardon Chelsea Manning and that was a big one. So I actually think, and I certainly don't want to make predictions on this one, but I think that one of them might be.

• 40:14Speaker 02

  Um, and, and I think that it would be, it would fall short of Trump's values that he puts forward about freedom of speech. Knowing the repercussions of both of Snowden and Assange being, um, in, in prison or not pardoned, I think he would do one. And the only reason I don't think he would do both is because people are in his ear. That's my, that's my, um, that's my personal opinion, but it's again, really hard to, to predict. Um, but I think that if you were a president running on freedom of speech and expression, freedom of the press, and if you were Trump condemning fake news all the time, surely one of them, you would think, right? You, you would, you would do it. So yeah, tough to say, but I've, I've got a feeling.

• 40:59Speaker 02

  Let's see, we, all we can do is prepare for every outcome and every contingency, right? And, um, and give it a crack.

• 41:05Anthony Pompliano?

  Yeah, I, uh, I tend to think that there's nothing more real than, uh, here's the source material, right? Read it for yourself and, uh, and make your own decision. Uh, what can people at home do? So it's about a week out until, uh, this, uh, this decision gets made. And yes, there may be appeals, depending on how it goes. There's pardons, you know, there's some kind of these, uh, external factors, but in the next week or so, what can an individual at home do? Is it literally get on Twitter and talk about it? Or are there other things that they can do?

• 41:33Speaker 02

  Yeah, I've thought about the Twitter one quite a bit, because in the early days, I thought it doesn't make much difference, right? But I've been at Amnesty for a few years now, and I have genuinely seen the difference it makes when a lot of people come together at the right time. And, you know, you might think the trending on Twitter thing is pretty trivial. I used to think it was pretty trivial. Maybe in some ways it still is, but I think that I've seen Assange trending on Twitter every single day, bar like one or two days here and there for the last two weeks, and scattered throughout the year. So

• 42:08Speaker 02

  I think it does have impact. I think that Twitter is actually a small sample size of public sentiment, but I think that it's an important one that politicians are aware of and do respond to, not all the time, but sometimes when it's important to respond to because of how it relates to the party or the politician. So Amnesty will be running a Twitter storm, I believe in early January. To condemn this, we've been making a lot of statements on Twitter, encouraging retweets. We've been working with people around the world, like celebrities, journalists, you know, filmmakers like MIA, Oliver Stone, you know, reaching out to people like Russell Brand and Noam Chomsky, who's shown a lot of support as well, and

• 42:54Speaker 02

  whoever it may be from all walks of life, once again, to show support on Twitter and online. And it does have an impact because it snowballs. And that's a big word I like to use with Amnesty is you can watch a campaign start from like a concept and then watch it slowly snowball, gather steam. And this is why, you know, campaigning and international movements are so important because they can do that, because you have mass numbers. And you don't ever think that your voice isn't important. I'll tell you right now, when I started campaigning on this, I thought like, you know, there was about this much of a good shot to really make traction, but In my mind, I was like, we can make it happen. Let's, let's just give this a really crack and don't let up.

• 43:37Speaker 02

  Be persistent, which is one of Amnesty's main values. Be courageous, have integrity, do it the right way. And, and if I look back on the last year and a half, it's been insane how much it's changed. And for everyone at home, even if you are like kind of on the fence, but you think you're maybe sixty, forty, you're more in favor. Speak up about it. Talk to your friends and family. Don't be afraid of conversations that, that, that might be uncomfortable. That's where most growth and progress happens when you have uncomfortable conversations, right? And with Assange, that's again, one that I've seen. People don't want to touch it. And then once they start learning a bit more about it, they go, okay, you know what? Why not? I'm more informed and, and, and this is a big area of passion as well because information, if it's the wrong information and then you spread it.

• 44:20Speaker 02

  Talking about viruses, if you spread it, that goes to that person, to that person, that person. All of a sudden, everyone thinks something, which is a little fraction of what the actual issue is. And again, like you said, source material, that's why it's so important in, in the right contexts. And that's why you should be informed and you should really check yourself before spreading or talking about certain information. That applies to not just Assange, but everything, right? And, and so, yeah, I think that, I think that people should speak up on Twitter. They should sign Amnesty's petition, which I can share, which was four hundred thousand. And Sydney here, representing the global movement, we've been pushing hard for our Aussie. You know, got four hundred thousand signatures. We handed it over to the US Embassy in, in Sydney. And it was one of the largest Australian petitions ever signed by Amnesty.

• 45:06Speaker 02

  And have, have had a lot of allies on board supporting us that you wouldn't expect. So I think that can continue to grow and just speak up online. I'm sure people have machine learning algorithms detecting how often, you know, certain keywords have put up online. And okay, public sentiment is saying this, maybe we should respond to it. That's the tech side kind of, kind of thinking, but, or talking. But I think that with that in mind, just put it out there, you know, talk to your friends and family, talk to your local members. If anyone can assist, please feel free to reach out. We can find new networks and connections to try and talk to, to the different parties and see if we can come to, to an agreement because this is crucial. Look, if we're a democracy, this is one of the principles we have to stand on.

• 45:46Anthony Pompliano?

  Yeah, couldn't agree more. For you personally, you're interested also in Bitcoin blockchain crypto. How does that kind of intersect here? And what are your thoughts on that stuff?

• 45:57Speaker 02

  Yeah, absolutely. I'm working on an app actually called Thinkers, and this is actually in line with with what I've just spoken about when it comes to quality information. We are at a point in our history where there is an abundance of information online. There's no question about that. And that has been one of the biggest talking points of the year is fake news, misinformation, these buzzwords thrown around. Myself and a team of people who are very passionate, Jay, Mel, and Lucy and Wilka and Dan, we're all very passionate about quality information and empowering people to critically think. And we think the solution is critical thinking. So

• 46:40Speaker 02

  with that comes in mind, a long-term process of analyzing the information, all the nuance. Don't just think black and white and like any skill with the community as well. It's a lot easier. You can practice it. So what is the context, you know, etc. So we built through, funnily enough, AI and machine learning, an algorithm that detects the keywords in every article that you read. It's a browser extension that will be integrated into an app in January. So coming very soon, and it scans the page and goes, here's who owns this publication. Here's the bias which you can vote on yourself, which gets aggregated.

• 47:18Speaker 02

  You know, it's an opinion piece, or it was really new, therefore it could be developing. These are all the things people need to think about when they consume information. So if you don't have the source material, here's a good way to help you think through the news you consume every day. Now, building the app, we wanted to build it with, you know, trust and privacy in mind from the get-go. So blockchain being a big factor, you know, having NFTs that we would give when we launch over the coming weeks, we want to give pioneer NFTs to new users that sign up so that we can reward quality journalism on our app. We want it to be a citizen journalism platform for local stories. We want to reward critical thinking. We want to reward.

• 47:56Speaker 02

  Um, you know, uh, um, quality nuanced discussion, not just the kind of back and forths that we do see on Twitter. And this is again, a thing that I've seen from so many different people going, I can't go on Twitter, man. I can't talk on this platform. I just get yelled at. It's just like yelling on this side, yelling on that side. Echo chamber after echo chamber polarization, right? Espousing. So our solution was, um, well moderated, community driven, um, rooms to talk in nuance about a lot of these conversations. And so that's going to be a big task, but we think we can certainly do it. And we want everyone to kind of help and build with us. Um, so yeah, that was thinkrs.io.

• 48:38Speaker 02

  And hopefully, yeah, next month will be very exciting. Um, we want to introduce a token in future and, and work towards a decentralized social media platform for everyone.

• 48:47Anthony Pompliano?

  It's awesome. Before we get into the rapid fire questions to wrap it up, where can people find you on the internet?

• 48:53Speaker 02

  Yeah, I'm, I'm on Twitter, um, you know, as well. I'm on there. So Chamira Gamage, so my full name. Um, and, uh, that's, that's, I would say, um, where I spend a little bit of my time. Um, I'm not too prominent on any other social medias just yet. I'm, I'm, I would hope that after we get thinkers up and running, we can try and start a new platform and see what we can do with maybe a bit more characters. So we can flesh out our thoughts a bit further before we dive into things. Um, but yeah, please feel free to reach out to me, um, there, um, or on email directly, which is, um, Chamira Gamage, um, seven at gmail.com.

• 49:30Anthony Pompliano?

  Awesome, man. Uh, ask the same two questions, everyone, before I wrap up and then you get to ask people to finish it. First question is, what is the most important book that you've ever read?

• 49:39Speaker 02

  That's a good one. Um, not to be corny, but probably The Alchemist. I know a lot of people would probably say that, but I, I've got to buy my nephew who's seventeen at Christmas. Uh, sorry. I've got to get him a birthday present. Um, I was going to get it for him for Christmas, but I thought, you know what? I'm going to give him The Alchemist. He's seventeen. I want him to read it just because of the anecdotes and the way to see the world, little signs, symbols around. The story and journey that you go on. I just think it's a beautiful, really well-written story that you should keep in the back of your mind.

• 50:09Anthony Pompliano?

  Yeah, that's a great, uh, great suggestion. Uh, second question, more fun. Aliens, are you a believer or a non-believer?

• 50:15Speaker 02

  Yeah. Yeah. If you asked me about two years ago, I would have said probably not. Um. Like a lot of people during COVID have had a bit of extra time to look at stuff. I would say yes. Yeah.

• 50:27Anthony Pompliano?

  I I agree. I didn't need COVID. I didn't need COVID to push me down the rabbit hole, but uh, but once you go down, man, it is.

• 50:36Speaker 02

  Once you're there, you're like, are you kidding me? And anyway, this year's been an intro, a big one for that, right? So I think this is going to continue to grow over time.

• 50:43Anthony Pompliano?

  I love it. Uh, what's the one question you have for me to wrap up?

• 50:49Speaker 02

  I'm not going to ask if you're bullish on Bitcoin because I know you are. So I'm going to say, what do you think will be the biggest startup trend for 2021?

• 50:58Anthony Pompliano?

  2021, um, I think just the continued financialization of assets and uh, and kind of the digitization of those assets. Right? So you see things like pipe, uh, specifically taking recurring revenue and is turning it into a financial asset. I think people are going to find all kinds of things to kind of financialize. But also we're going to see every stock, bond, currency, commodity go from uh, kind of electronic Q SIP world to a digital world. Markets will become 24/7, 365, you'll kind of really, really break open accessibility for people around the world. Uh, and kind of just rebuild the financial system for a digital global world. Like, you know, not that groundbreaking of an idea, but a lot of work goes into doing that.

• 51:40Anthony Pompliano?

  Uh, but I think that's kind of where we're headed, uh, you know, hopefully in the next couple of years, for sure.

• 51:44Speaker 02

  Absolutely. And I know you think it's, you know, as you said, not too groundbreaking, but um, the more I've learned about these systems and where it's headed, to be honest, the more you read, the more you learn, you, like I said before, you kind of just know this is where it's going to head. It's, it's an amazing concept and technology. And I think, I think we're just at the precipice. We're just getting started.

• 52:07Anthony Pompliano?

  I tend to agree, my friend. All right. Listen, thank you so much for doing this, Chamira. I really think that people are going to enjoy hearing more about Julian Assange. And if this kind of, you know, speaks to you, you think it's a big deal, please, uh, please go tell family, friends and uh, talk about it online. We've got about a week before the decision and every little bit helps. So thanks so much for uh, for coming on and doing this.

• 52:27Speaker 02

  Thank you, man. My pleasure. My pleasure.