this hard drugs causing addiction and literally destroying the human body became a gold mine for business men from the foggy albion. however, the ruling chinese jing dynasty tried to resist and to stop the illegal trade, which provoked the wrath of the london business community. in 1840 without a declaration of war, the english fleet began to seize and plunder chinese coastal boards. the poorly armed and morally drained chinese army was unable to provide adequate resistance. the jing empire was forced to hand hong kong over to england and open it sports for trading the lethal goods. in 1856, france and the united states joined in the robbery of china. the anglo french troops defeated the chinese occupied beijing and committed an unprecedented robbery . destroyed and blundered the wealth of the un, ming, you and palace. the defeat of the jing dynasty in the do opium wars lead to the

transformation of the celestial empire into a semi colony of european states and started its age of humiliation. and the sale of opium took on colossal proportions and led to the horrible death of millions of ordinary chinese. ah, i look forward to talking to you all. that technology should work for people. a robot must obey the orders given by human beings, except where such order is a conflict with the 1st law. and just in case we should be very careful about artificial intelligence. and the point obviously is to place trust rather than fear a very job with artificial intelligence. real, somebody with

for obama's protect his own existence, his own exist. oh, what he's got to do is identify the threats that we have. it's crazy confrontation, let it be an arms race is on offensive, very dramatic development. only personally and going to resist. i don't see how that strategy will be successful, very critical time. time to sit down and talk. 2 2 ah, we've all seen the news since late 2022, that president donald trump had classified documents in his home in mara lago florida. and just as democrats began gloating and talking about whether or not the former president would be prosecuted, classified documents were found in president biden's home in delaware, and in the washington dc office that he used in the years between being vice

president and being elected president. former vice president mike pence then admitted that he too had classified documents in his home. so what happens next to they all get prosecuted? should they be prosecuted? i'm john kerry aku welcome to the whistleblowers. ah. 2 it seems that all the talk in washington these days is about classified documents . who has them? why are they retained and what should be done about it? but those are the easy questions. the more difficult questions concern why the american government produces more than 100000000 classified documents every year. how many of those documents are properly and legitimately classified and why over the years has the mishandling of those documents, whether properly classified or not, ended up being equated with espionage. one of the gravest cr times with which an

american can be charged will classified documents in the possession of former leaders. just lead to the next step in draconian national security punishments. or is this an opportunity to revamp the system and return some sanity to the classification process? we're happy to have with us. jeslane radack. jeslane is the executive director of the whistleblower and source protection program at expose facts in washington. she's also a former justice department ethics attorney and a whistleblower in her own right. it's great to have you just thanks for joining us . thank you for having me. let's start with these classified documents that have been found in the homes and offices of donald trump. joe biden and mike pence, do we even know with these documents are, are they highly classified national security secrets, or are they just routine diplomatic messages that are classified only out of force of habit? what do we know? we don't know. i mean it, the fact that they are classified indicates that they are either secret, top,

secret or top secret sensitive compartment and information that we have no idea of what they, what they relate to, what the subject matter, isabelle. and given that we have a huge problem with over classification, in this country, it is entirely possible that they are very innocuous documents that were just stamped classified as, as the matter of routine. jess, in the interest of transparency, i want to say that you and i are not only friends, but you are also one of my attorneys in my own national security case in 2012. in my case, my judge made a ruling that had a major impact on the way the courts look at cases like this. she said that the definition of espionage was very simply providing national defense information to any person, not entitled to receive it. with that definition, a person could accidentally commit espionage. for example, if

a person leaves classified documents in a restaurant and somebody else in the restaurant sees them and reads them, the person who accidentally left the documents there has technically committed espionage. if a person has a conversation, let's say with a journalist and says something that could be construed is classified or is based on classified information, even if it's just analysis that would be espionage. with that said, we all know that washington runs on leaks. so what's the end game here? just block everybody up for espionage? well, the people getting locked up for espionage are not the leakers who have political power. so in other words, joe biden and, and mike pence and donald trump are certainly not going to be locked up for revealing classified information. just like c i a director betray us was not locked up. i or, nor was c. i a director, anita. so the people with power and prestige are safe. it's the lower level

employees who are going to get skewered under the espionage act. if they disclose classified information, even if there is a compelling public interest reason for doing so. when i was working at the cia and this was in the mid 1990 s, a woman i sat next to was having an affair with a journalist. in the course of that affair, she told him something that was classified, and he repeated it on the air on cnn. a cia investigation led directly back to her and she admitted that she had revealed the information. she was suspended without pay for $4.00 weeks and was not allowed to be promoted for one year. that was it. today she would face at least 10 years in prison for doing the same thing. how did we get to this point? and why do you think that happened? you? i think we got to this point in part because again, there's

a huge problem after 911 with ramping over classification, which makes it much easier to accidentally leak something classified, especially when things are not routinely classified at all. or sometimes unclassified in one in one agency, but classified in another. and then i also think we got here because brock obama thought for some reason it was a good idea to dust off the espionage act of 1917 and use it on whistleblowers. and that was very disappointing from someone who was supposed to be at the transparency president and supporting federal workers and that kind of thing . but it unleashed what is now a normalization of going after sources and whistleblowers criminally. and there are a number of criminal laws that could be applied, but the espionage act is by far the most brutal,

near the end of 2022 representative ill on omar sponsored a bill in the house of representatives that would have completely revamped and rewritten the espionage act, so that we wouldn't have cases like mine or like jeffrey sterling's or reality winners. that bill went nowhere. it didn't even make it out of subcommittee. do you think that there is any mood on capitol hill to say yes, but i am not holding my breath. i, you know, i think i think a lot of people in positions of power in and jo, including legislators feel that this is good for plugging weeks. and again, they don't have to worry about it being deployed against them or any of their high level cronies. because it's only used against, against low level government officials, specifically ones who have revealed information that evidence is illegality or things that are embarrassing to the gover. government, like torture,

secret surveillance, war crimes. those are the kinds of leaks they got prosecuted. and they are also some of the darkest most controversial programs in u. s. modern history. one of the most important sticking points when thinking about the espionage act is the absence of something called an affirmative defense. whistleblowers are not legally allowed to either use as a defense or to stand up in court and say that what they did they did in the public interest. i blew the whistle on the sea ice torture program, which was an illegal program. the judge didn't care at snowden told us that the u. s. government was spying on american citizens, which was illegal. it didn't matter. the heroic whistleblower daniel hale told us that the u. s. military's drone program was illegally killing scores of innocent people including children. he's now in a maximum security prison. why are the government and the courts so afraid of an affirmative defense?

the ill hon. omar bill would have allowed for one, but it died without ever coming up for a vote. i think the government loves a strict liability law that renders any defendant without a defense because they don't have to even try to make the case. all they have to show is that a disclosure did or did not happen. and unlike every other law in the criminal system where your intent would be relevant, oh, you know, the government said we, you know, we'd never tortured anyone, but i hope torture. someone or we did torture people. i mean, that's why they don't want there to be any kind of intent and miserable by. they don't want to have any kind of public interest defense because you would actually understand why people are being charged with the very draconian espionage act at you know, and it, having a strict liability law just makes it easy to slam dunk cases and virtually

impossible to defend one of these cases because they take place largely in secret and again, you don't have any kind of meaningful defense. you can raise an impact. your intent only becomes relevant at sentencing. meaning after you've been convicted, we're speaking with attorney activist and whistleblower jaslyn rate act about classified documents and the espionage act. we're going to take a short break and come right back. stay with us. 2 ah, a quad doors was 3. i mean with that on. i mean our hatamio was how your ship was through supplement. i was a hair dresser, a bus driver, a sales person. anyone could become a victim,

that's our private negotiators. first appeared with the steel remove. we would have them for to see mr. russell. no one will probably not a necessity, but they need more. your will be up along with my mom that on the global dilemma is only be feasible. miss shannon from a yet to be a study sports took over the serious me with this request was in the window list was to secondly ah, the us class lap last. it's imperial yet, but it is a way burial. power is raining and you read you read different articles,

different journals. it's clear that they are aware that their power is wage. they don't want to with a, with what the clinic, this is sort of with them. no go, you have to be home with white glove ski. know we do mom with daughter slash a flash. yeah,

cuz that would have moved enough. i just want to little social love to let you know . describe your record what. what sib, which is good for that, you will need to do it all good was a, does this me bite feet long? oh you something more, less room would you do by oh, place yet the us got not reporting something than bringing out any of the us history. illegal conduct. just one of the things that disturbs me is the fact that julian assigns has not had the support of most of the major news outlets here in the united states. there was an open letter that the new york times signed along with the guardian and l. i e s, and lamond, and a couple of other papers. but after that we didn't see similar announcements from the washington post and the wall street journal and cnn. why is it that these

outlets are not jumping to julian sanchez? defense when, if julian is, is convicted, they'll certainly be the next to be targeted. you know, i think the statement that came out with the very newspapers was a little too little a lot too late. and then it is disappointing me the unwillingness to coalesce around assange in the mainstream media and even the alternative media. but i think that's because he has been so vilified over the last number of years that it's hard for people, you know, whatever you think of a sancha as a person, people, people are care concerning him and basing their lack of support on that rather than on the larger ramifications that this decision will have in terms of affecting all journalists and the u. s. has done such

a great job mirroring him in every possible way, including with allegations about russia, stuff that's not in the indictment bio, by the way, all the stuff in the indictment dates back to 2010 era. but i think, you know, i wish i think these people like to say, oh, he's not a publisher. he's not a journalist, but you know, again, creating that kind of litmus test. he, he's, he is a publisher. he is a journalist, as a blocker, technically could be prosecuted under the espionage act. any joe hmo, who shares a new newspaper article with someone else that happens to can in classified is technically in violation of this law. you know, i think they are trying to authorize him and paint him as not a real journalist and a renegade. and oh, he was playing footsie with the russians and, oh, stuff happened in sweet and, and,

and everything that has to do with his person and not his profession. and it's really slimy. i think people are sophisticated enough to know better. the ones who are doing that but even this, oh, he's not a real journalist. that's neither here nor there when it comes to the espionage act . so i, you know, i wish more people would see could just disastrous preston that this is going to create that really is gonna imperil all investigative journalism in the national security arena. just do you believe that julian assange can get a fair trial in the eastern district of virginia, where his jury would be made up of people who work for, or people who have relatives or friends who work for the cia, the f. b. i the pentagon, the department of homeland security or intelligence community contractors. but i

think it's impossible for him to get a fair trial no matter where he is, because he's being charged under the espionage act. but you bring up a good point that he has been indicted in the most conservative court in the entire country. that is the bashed and it's at the center of the cia, the essay, the f, b i all these intelligence agencies. so it would hardly be a friendly jury pool, and again, it's known as a rocket docket because it just jams cases through and it is a known as a brute old the most conservative court in the country, which is saying a law thief. ok. so i did the fact that they strategically decided to do that shows, you know, it just goes, but lives is ation of those. and how much it's about politics, the now about any personal mosquito, because we see classification classified information every single day. every time we the washington post the new york times,

you know classified information is published every day, but clearly the u. s. has had it sites on getting a funds for a very long time on that i think has been very short sighted in terms of the deleterious consequences. this was going to have on all journalists, you work closely with myriad national security whistleblowers. the costs of whistle blowing continue to increase, but people continue also to come forward. whistle blowers know the cost that they'll likely pay, but they continue to come forward and to call out evidence of waste, fraud, abuse, illegality, and threats to the public health and public safety. why do you think that is? why do they continue to speak out in the face of potentially life changing retaliation? i think a lot of them don't think that they're going to be retaliated against because in their minds they're doing the right thing. they're telling the truth, i mean,

look at reality, she told me it made, you know, a truthful, factual, accurate representation that russia was trying to interfere in the elections. people think they're not going to be punished for telling the truth. why would you be punished for revealing torture, which is illegal, unconstitutional, and unethical? so that's part of it, but the other part is also that courage is contagious, and most people do have a conscience. and the people going after the whistleblowers are the moral invertebrates in this country who are self serving and don't really care about that with interest. so i think people, by and large, they want to be able to sleep at night. they want to believe their country will do the right thing or correct the wrong thing. finally, just tell us how drone whistleblower daniel hale is doing. you're one of his attorneys. we were both in the court room during his sentencing. when a relatively enlightened judge gave him a sentence that was significantly shorter than what the justice department was

asking for. the judge also recommended that daniel be sent to a low security prison, where he could also receive treatment for a medical condition. but the bureau of prisons sent him instead to a maximum security penitentiary. and even then they put him in a restrictive communications management unit. is that justice department policy? how was he doing? despite all of that horrible stuff he just laid out. he is very resilient, grounded, thought whole young man, and he's doing as well as can be expected to judge actually yes. was very sensitive to the fact that daniel was struggling with t e, an inside and depression. and wanted him as a medical facility where he could get some therapeutic intervention. and unfortunately, that doesn't happen. i mean they're only to see amuse country and they were built

to house terror. so again, it's most people in there are in there for life. so he has a lot of restrictions that even death row inmates don't have restrictions on his communications that even people in the super mac don't have, they can communicate, they can write letters back and forth with people with him. every single letter that comes in is xerox, and he only gets a copy of it. if he gets that at all, it's very hard to schedule a phone call even as his lawyer. so it has been very frustrating and overly punitive. but unfortunately, you have the judge had made a recommendation that he be placed at a medical facility, but it was not an order. and so of course, the bureau of prisons took advantage of that and put him in the c, m u. and i said, why on earth is he in a c, m u. and he said because his crime involved

a communications based offense. and i said his crime with communicating with a journalist. so think deeply about that, that that's the reason the communications the ascent wasn't he communicated with the journalist? not with a spy, not with a hostile foreign agency, nothing like that. but with a regular journalist, i'd like to thank our guest attorney activist and whistleblower jacelyn rate act for joining us. and thanks to our viewers. former us president theodore roosevelt once said that quote, patriotism means to stand by the country. it does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he, himself stands by the country. and it is unpatriotic not to tell the truth whether about the president or about anyone else on quote. let's hope that more and more people are able to come forward and do exactly that. i'm john kerry aku and you've

been watching the whistleblowers until next time. 2 2 ah, ah, working together with no longer it has been a member of the european union and nato since 1999 during the 1st post soviet wave of nato's eastwood expansion number bacillus because of this thing. my logo thanks is de leon lamp realty. we're gonna see like, by law as

a conscience. so e, so me that me it if so with sure. zappa i did do my efforts to avoid to be sure the name. yeah. still more gina beach ross here, but i see also bosh, roy. i'm a gucci. struggling in, in the early ninety's hungry was a country with a worst view of russia due to historical disagreements left over from the soviet union in georgia. again, given those, all right. and what are you, someone like yours or what i see if you wrote a political more than as what i see is great. and i did it at the body of the house with a nation may be able to turn a blind eye to atrocities and other countries. united states of america is different. wearable people long to be free. they will find a friend in the united states. ah,

with it out of anybody, i think all anybody basie, sincerely, city and key jaw. you look at both and say they said we'd cigarettes peel color revolutions is one among several means to reach the goal of conquering foreign lands and bringing them onto the help of u. s. western economic interest. super been sadie. i did that to everybody. the demo lexia learning training course. so no, we just say they're soft. our american final goal of the same revolutions is to ensure that there are no independent players in the world anymore.

ah, a massive laser wraps out an oil devil in crime me up with the local authorities. seeing a drone strike could be the cause of that fire. also ahead on the program. you can see this house has been completely destroyed. the woman that i just spoke with cannot stop crying. she's 89 years old and doesn't really understand what to do next. r t visit civilian areas in the done yet republic. devastated by ukrainian . it strikes by force that pill and civilian, including a child over the last 2 days across the region. disturbing images are head as well . now this by.