Uh... Jenni, I just had an idea my friend

It might require international courts though... but it is an interesting long game, you perhaps may have thought of this, perhaps not, you and the legal community abroad must forgive my lack of wording, so if i say something in error, hear me out as this just came into my head whilst watching this clip by former Ecuadorian president, Rafael Correa.

What a great man by the way, i think the way he discusses Julian's asylum status, is both mature and level headed, deflecting all questions and making it very clear, they wanted to first and foremost, protect his human rights, everything else is secondary, and also in a very mature way, stating, that if he did something inappropriate, there would be repercussions, lack of internet, etc, just like a father would do to a child, but, one does not throw their child (even if adopted in this metaphor) to the wolves.

Full Disclosure Legal World: From here on out, i really have no idea what the fuck i am talking about, i am not a lawyer, love law, but i dont know the shit you do, this was just an idea that popped into my head just now.

This ones for you Mrs Robinson.

Operation Checkmate<<<

Assange has had his Asylum status in Ecuador revoked by President Moreno, curiously, after Wikileaks had exposed corruption involving him, and his government party, that would, if the allegations proven true, would call for investigation and demotion of position within his own country.

If we presume, and this is just an educated hypothesis, not something of slander, that Mr Moreno did this as what many speculate as revenge, curiously, at the same time he was offered a great sum of money from the U.S.A, if, this hypothesis, could be proven true, could it, then be seen that his decision to revoke Julian's Asylum status was an erroneous abuse of executive powers acting with personal interest, and if so, and proven verifiable, raise grounds, for legal action stating, that as such, the decision, should be rescinded.

Where i am going with this, is similar to how one thinks of contract law, if a contract and the process of it, is not executed correctly, the outcomes of such, are subsequently invalidated, if we can prove, that there was agenda, motive and an abuse of executive powers by President Moreno, does this, thus subsequently invalidate the outcome?

I ask the question, as i don't know how law works, let alone international law.

But as an individual it seems reasonable to me on the principles of logic, that if someone, made a decision, that in and of itself, was founded unlawfully, that must logically, give grounds for that decision to be reversed?

If, we were to play this angle, i think it could be interesting.

As if it can be reversed there is a lot of hope for Julian.

What we know already is that international Asylum protocols have been violated, if we can prove this was done with malicious intent acting in self interest by a corrupt official, surely we could have it reversed.

If it is reversed, he has now stood trial, and been convicted for jumping bail in the UK by the UK, for which, worse case scenario he serves 6 to 12 months in prison (nothing compared to his 7 years of self imposed prison) but if his Asylum status is then re-instated because it has been found legally, to have been revoked unlawfully were then in a very interesting situation...

In such a scenario, which i appreciate, is probably pretty uncommon in law, if Asylum status is re-granted, due to such unlawful activity, is there any precedent, or stipulation that he must be returned to the exact same place (i.e. Embassy in London)

If not, after serving his time, for the bail jumping, could he not then be sent to, another Ecuador location, say perhaps, the Ecuador Embassy in Canberra? at which time, he could walk out, returning to Australia and be protected by Australian Law, not to allow extradition of citizens acting as Journalists publishing factual, truthful information that is within the scope of Public Interest.

What he did, is no different to the Washington Post & New York Times, with the pentagon papers, regarding the war in Vietnam.

I think this is an interesting strategy, if what i am discussing, is legally possible (i dont know) because even if the UK does agree to Extradite him, if we can prove this case, there would be grounds to "pull him out" under international law, if his Asylum status could be re-instated.

I can understand under normal circumstances, a nation may argue that once in their custody, it is their jurisdiction, however, if we can prove that his Asylum being revoked, was unlawful and criminal with malicious intent, no matter where he ends up, are there reasonable grounds for saying "Listen yes he is here, but he is not supposed to be, the fact he is, makes this unfair, and he thus forth, should be aloud in fairness, his legal rights, which were taken from him due to criminal activity"

Perhaps, that keeps him held in an Embassy in the US, but at that point, the courts have a choice right? well Asylum in Ecuador, stipulates, any part of Ecuador, so if we could play that technicality, they would have to choose where to re-locate him.

There are only two logical legal decisions, an Embassy in the US or UK? Why? that makes no sense, he would just be there because of technicality, the only other options would be directly to Ecuador (which would be good for him) or back to Australia of which he is a resident (Equally good for him) and if he has at that point, served his time for the bail charges, even if they do try and hold him up in a US Ecuador Embassy, does he then, with no charges pending, have grounds to arrange for lawful transportation back to his country of Asylum?

From which, he could lawfully arrange for transportation back to Australia, and then so, be protected by international protocols regarding freedom of the press?

Yeah ... its complicated, but i think its a game plan, im not a lawyer Mrs Robinson so do forgive me, but i am sure you can grasp what i am alluding to here.

The legal fee's are expensive, but a good proportion of the Cryptocurrency community are in support of Julian, and the donations will keep coming, so long as there is some sort of plan of action for his legal defense.

You can do this Jennifer, we are all with you.