Slashdot Mirror
Washington Post: Assange 'Unlikely To Be Prosecuted In US'
vikingpower writes "The Justice Department has all but concluded it will not bring charges against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange for publishing classified documents because government lawyers said they could not do so without also prosecuting U.S. news organizations and journalists, according to U.S. officials." That "all but" probably wouldn't feel all that comforting if this announcement applied to me.
Rot in jail for years before a 'trial'? Oh hell yes we'd do that to him.
Embarassed the powers that be... They got a hardon for him now.
[You know what goes here.]
Well, I guess the Washington Post can say whatever they like.
Please accept my personal guarantee that if Julian Assange were to arrive in New York on Christmas Day, he would be immediately arrested and charged with all sorts of obscure charges. He would then rot in a cell for several years(~6) before seeing the inside of a court room.
I guarantee it.
- Not George Zimmerman
Obama/DoJ also promised they wouldn't go after Cannabis dispensaries and growers in medical states but that was a lie.
He is still wanted in the UK for skipping bail. Even if the US were not lying he still can't just walk out of the embassy.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Hey, guys, isn't "prosecution" some sort of procedural step that we used to have to go through before getting to the indefinite detention and torture phase?
So that means he would never appear before a judge. In fact, he might just disappear altogether.
Lacking <sarcasm> tags,
I have all but concluded that I will probably not eat that piece of chocolate cake in the fridge.
That sweet chocolatty cake.
That dark moist delicious cake.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
Just like all those people in GITMO. They haven't been charged with any crimes either.
Proverbs 21:19
But he's guilty of the Worst Crime Possible in the United States: embarrassing politicians. They'll never just let him get away with it.
The threat of prosecution is at least a small comfort, because it sort of implies they might actually play by some rule book. But if prosecution is off the table, that leaves drone interdiction, indefinite detention, or torture as the only options.
If I were Mr. Assange, the words "no prosecution" would send a cold shiver down my spine.
We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
Put your tinfoil hat away, he was freely walking the streets of the UK, until he exhausted his appeals in the Swedish case. Say what you will about Assange (I've said plenty), he's not a complete moron, the fact that he waited until he ran out of appeals spokes volumes about what he's really worried (Sweden) about. If he was worried about extradition to the United States why didn't he run the embassy sooner? Ditto for concerns about being charged in the UK.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
If he or Edward Snowden ever land on American soil again, they'll be thrown in jail before the TSA even has a chance to harass them. If they can't get him them on espionage charges, they'll trump up some other charges (probably along the lines of rape, child molestation, puppy abuse, etc. to discredit them to boot), or just not even bother with charges at all and send them straight down to Cuba for indefinite detention.
They've committed the greatest crime of all, embarrassing the U.S. Government. And that carries a mandatory life sentence with no trial.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
Very sad that someone can be granted political asylum and *still* Sweden refuses to do a simple interview. Speaks volumes for the real intent of Sweden (hint: nothing to do with justice, all about locking people away for embarrassing those in power and bringing some long needed transparency into the public realm.)
Not the OP, but...
so...**no matter what** you view the US government as so untrustworthy
An extremely reasonable position to hold, even before Wikileaks/Snowden.
that there is absolutely nothing the Obama administration could do for you to thing they are telling the truth?
Grant him complete amnesty, publicly.
Question: how can NSA employees travel outside the USA without fear of being arrested for espionage? What did Assange do that the NSA does not do? Spying on the communications of national leaders -- that's not a criminal offense in, for example, Germany?
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
so...**no matter what** you view the US government as so untrustworthy that there is absolutely nothing the Obama administration could do for you to thing they are telling the truth?
you want to see Assange, in NYC attending galas, at Harvard lecturing, in DC testifying (freely) before a Senate Judiciary hearing on privacy in the 21st Century...you want that, right? you would have to see it happen?
otherwise, you don't believe a single word the Obama administration says?
Am I accurately representing your position?
Well I would of added they could burn the Utah datacenter to ash dismantle the NSA prosecute and convict everyone involved in the massive wiretapping of the whole planet repeal the patriot act shut down fica court and bar the judges involved form ever becoming a judge at any level ever again shutdown gitmo and then finally they themselves resign then I might believe them.
---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
Nobody has ever or will ever in the history of Sweden been "charged" for anything, for the simple reason that the Swedish judicial system doesn't use English terms. This may sound semantics, but it's actually the key point. There are two terms of relevance in the swedish system: "anklagad" and "åtalad". Look them up in a handful of Swedish dictionaries (there's dozens out there); you'll find that both can be translated "accused, charged, or indicted".
In a legal process, being anklagad comes first. The prosecutor raises this stage and must have grounds for probable cause. At this point warrants can be issued for the person's arrest. The person also has the right to appeal being anklagad and have a full court hearing reviewing the evidence (and even to appeal that court ruling).
The only thing that being anklagad doesn't do is lead to a trial. This is what being åtalad does. In fact, once åtalad, you *must* be tried within a fixed period of time. As a standard, there is a questioning immediately before being åtalad.
So while people can play word games, probably the most analagous terms would be "charged" for anklagad and "indicted" for åtalad.
Assange has been anklagad but not åtalad. Nor can he be åtalad, because he refuses to hand himself over and he cannot be tried in absentia. So to use "he hasn't been charged!" as a defense of him is simply deceptive.
And, FYI, here's the sworn-in-court written statement of the Swedish prosecutor:
Don't be surprised that Assange pulls stuff like this, the guy is a BS artist about almost everything in his life. Check out the 10 different stories he's told about why his hair is white, for example. My favorite is that it's due to gamma radiation from a nuclear reactor he built as a child.
You know when it's okay to shout fire in a crowded theatre? When it's on fire.
Yep, and I remember when a NY prosecutor said he had a *rock solid* case against Dominique Strauss Kahn, and then suddenly decided that the whole case was bogus exactly three days after Kahn's successor at the IMF was sworn in.
But your naivete is cute.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."