Slashdot Mirror
Justice Department Is Preparing To Prosecute WikiLeaks Founder Julian Assange (wsj.com)
According to the Wall Street Journal, "the Justice Department is preparing to prosecute WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange (Warning: source paywalled; alternative source) and is increasingly optimistic it will be able to get him into a U.S. courtroom." From the report: Over the past year, U.S. prosecutors have discussed several types of charges they could potentially bring against Mr. Assange, the people said. Mr. Assange has lived in the Ecuadorean embassy in London since receiving political asylum from the South American country in 2012. The people familiar with the case wouldn't describe whether discussions were under way with the U.K. or Ecuador about Mr. Assange, but said they were encouraged by recent developments.
Prosecutors have considered publicly indicting Mr. Assange to try to trigger his removal from the embassy, the people said, because a detailed explanation of the evidence against Mr. Assange could give Ecuadorean authorities a reason to turn him over. The exact charges Justice Department might pursue remain unclear, but they may involve the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the disclosure of national defense-related information.
Prosecutors have considered publicly indicting Mr. Assange to try to trigger his removal from the embassy, the people said, because a detailed explanation of the evidence against Mr. Assange could give Ecuadorean authorities a reason to turn him over. The exact charges Justice Department might pursue remain unclear, but they may involve the Espionage Act, which criminalizes the disclosure of national defense-related information.
...leave the man alone.
Julian Assange was right to not to go to Sweden.
Being both an asshole and paranoid didn't mean he was wrong.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
His fears were correct that the US justice department are getting ready to indict him, and somehow bring him back to the US?
Just remember, the head of the Justice Department is Trump's new appointee Matthew Whittaker, who was a patent troll whose company was shut down for fraud and whose claim to fame was a toilet designed for guys with really big dicks and a time-traveling bitcoin-based commodity..
I did not make that up.
https://boingboing.net/2018/11...
https://theslot.jezebel.com/th...
So if you have a problem with Julian Assange being prosecuted, take it up with Hair Furor.
You are welcome on my lawn.
What? Telling the Truth? Out loud? Without a Permit? I love how the people he EXPOSED are still FREE AS BIRDS, but this guy just HAS To be "Prosecuted"
How do we get the right to prosecute a foreign national doing things in a foreign country that are protected by our own first amendment? Really don't understand this.
It's not paranoia when they're actually out to get you.
Here's hoping Assange ( or another of our favorite whistle blowers currently residing in Russia ) held back some seriously juicy documents for the world to ponder over in the event something like this ever becomes a reality.
That's a really nice $illegal_as_hell_with_a_silly_operation_name Surveillance System you have there . . . . would be a shame if something happened to it. . . . . .
Mr. Assange's platform has shrunk dramatically during his internment. If we had the audacity to put him on trial he'd become more powerful than he has ever been.
That would not be permitted. There would be a Jack Ruby. I'd wager a pint on it.
He's not a US citizen, he owes no fucking allegiance to the US. He has no duty to protect US secrets or to the US government. Screw the US for presuming that they can bully the world for publishing information they don't like.
Wonder if they're legit. That's his last resort.
your thin skin doesn't make me a troll
And Fuck the Australian government for not protecting one of our own. Vote Independant next Federal election and turf these assholes out. Labor is making deals with China's Belt and Road and the Liberals are just scum. None of them deserve government.
Impossible -- he's not an American citizen (or even a legal resident) and thus doesn't owe allegiance or fealty to the US.
... will be that he's a publisher and protected by freedom of the press.
When his name first surfaced in association with Wikileaks, he made it clear that he was simply the "spokesman," and did not "hack," or supervise the release of material, and had no way to know what the internal workings were.
He was simply the front man.
That's how he circumvented culpability for a hell of a lot of years.
Wikileaks itself elevated interest in Assange when the organization turned political in a move to increase donations which had fallen off due to lack of interest by supporters.
Wikileak's decline also affected Assange's visibility and he resented the lack of attention.
Assange started to take some credit for the material Wikileaks was releasing.
That was incriminating and blew his credibility as a distant spokesperson.
For that reason, he asserted that he was a journalist and that Wikileaks was a publishing house.
I'm leaving out the the narrative regarding his relationship with two women because those details are irrelevant.
With the loss of Ecuador's support, Assange is in deep shit.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
Look, I am not a fan of Assange. I believe in trying Snowden for treason and that manning should still be in jail.
BUT, Assange is not an American citizen. He is Australian. The fact that he received stolen data is no excuse for us to prosecute him.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Leave it in your ass, moron, you don't know shit.
How's he supposed to learn about shit if he leaves it in his ass?? Sometimes you've just got to get your hands dirty.
.. a long string of Bluffs. There are no charges. The UK police had him and could have extradited him, they did not. Julian offered to turn himself over in exchange for the release of Manning, They released him but Obama nullified Julians offer. The rape allegations turned out to be nothing. The UK police going into the Embassy was not to take him out but to verify he was still there. The UK Police and their leads know full well the embassy border laws. They went ion because I bluffed them. There was a single video feed of that night by a supposed independent, there were several streams/urls of this video feed but one with a chat box. I posted "Julian left the building two weeks ago". Verification was asked for, I stayed quiet, they went in (all this within 15 minutes).
Why the Bluffs? It sends the message the people have no control over their government and that the news media better stay away from the truth. Apparently, they pretty much are and this is not the first time the news media has been threatened as there was an anthrax issue in 2001.
There are no viable charges against Wikileaks nor Assange. Not by Sweden, UK nor the US.
Julian has dug deep into the world of secrets and has seen how nasty some in power can be and have been, Snowden has contributed to this exposure. But knowing all this, how easy is it for Julian to see the Bluff?
Naturally, it was a ruse back then to get Assange to drop his guard. My main hope at this point is that formal charges will get the ball rolling on actual due process. Fortunately, the Deep State usually hates laying its cards on the table, so I'm optimistic that if some authority is required by a court to lay facts and evidence down for all to see, then they'll scurry away and drop the charges.
His power was leaking things. It's surprisingly hard to do that from a maximum security prison. Heck, he hasn't leaked anything since the Trump election. It's not that his platform has shrunk, it's that he doesn't have any content.
Kill him and you'll have decades of conspiracies and more than a few copy cats. Lock him up and he just goes away.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
the kind that make a crime committed in another country against our citizens or our gov't prosecutable via extradition treaty?
I suppose you can argue that what he did shouldn't be a crime. Heck, I'm not even sure what they'd charge him with.
Still, if you didn't want him prosecuted you were probably better off with Bernie. Yeah, Hilary cheated to win the primary, but she was such a lousy candidate that shouldn't have mattered. If she'd lost like she should have (by 10+ points) we'd be saying "Mr President" to Bernie right now. But folks either stayed home or registered GOP and didn't vote for him in the primary.
The bad guys cheat. Get over it. It happens. But if the good guys stay home then what do you expect?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
"they were encouraged by recent developments"
The recent encouraging developments involved the Ecuadorians begging for someone to help them get rid of their pain in the ass squatter. The only thing the US could legitimately charge him with is possession of stolen property. And even that charge is weak. Assange is not a US citizen so the Espionage Act doesn't apply. And he neither stole or distributed the stolen data in US territory. Assange created his own mess and had he not been looking to promote himself as a martyr the Ecuadorans would be rid of their obnoxious house guest.
Assange's biggest mistake? Wikileaks was suppose to provide a conduit where someone could publish information while maintaining their anonymity. Instead of just publishing the information while keeping the submitter anonymous he took ownership and total control of the submitted information and proceeded to use that information to benefit only himself and push his political agenda. He went around to other media outlets making demands on how they would use the information when released. He solicited money in return for allowing access to the data by others. He alienated every single employee of Wikileaks because of his behavior.
Exactly. It's tough to think of someone who comes off as more slimy and repulsive than Julian Assange. The man has a demeanor of a reptile. But Wikileaks and his work are the real reason he is being persecuted and no free thinking person who believes in democracy and rule by the people support that persecution.
Funny how they complain about the immigrants, but are happy to let them do the shit jobs they don't want to be dirtied by themselves.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Not necessarily. No matter the charges, if he was found guilty on them and was sentenced, the time spent in prison might be less than the time spent in the embassy, which by any other form is just another prison.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
You realize we are talking about the US right? Basically the only country in the world that still thinks it is okay to torture people?
They're actually trying to do things a little bit more by the book.
No shame though, my god!
A blog I run for the wealth
You realize we are talking about the US right? Basically the only country in the world that still thinks it is okay to torture people?
For values of "basically" approaching, "no, not really", yes.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
What law are you referring to?
The eternal law: do not piss off powerful people if you want to live long.
The US is just pissed Wikileaks exposed American war crimes.
The country he without any consideration could go to a few months before it became "dangerous"?
The country that doesn't just extradite people to the US or elsewhere?
The country that explicitly refuses to extradite people for political crimes and anything that could in theory lead to a death penalty?
The country that isn't a NATO member with very close ties to the US?
The country that _isn't_ the UK which is a NATO member with very close ties to the US, the country that Assange for some reason choose to stay even though "fearing for his life"?
Yes he was right to not go to Sweden as being convicted as a rapist isn't nice for his image as a messiah. But is it any better to concont this kind of bullshit?
How lucky the founding fathers did not care about it.
Julian Assange was right to not to go to Sweden.
Much like any alleged rapist doesn't want to be brought into a courtroom. Nice though they are said to be, Swedish prison is still prison.
The "Rube Goldberg" conceptions about extraditing Assange from Sweden instead of the UK are bizarre fantasies.
For all you know this is just a troll to get Assange to continue imprisoning himself.
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
"Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners" https://www.ohchr.org/en/profe...
21. (1) Every prisoner who is not employed in outdoor work shall have at least one hour of suitable exercise in the open air daily if the weather permits.
The US and Sweden authorities could count these six years of inhuman conditions as a complete punishment. One year is such inhuman conditions could count at least as five years.
Julian Assange was right to not to go to Sweden.
Of course he was right, otherwise he'd be in a Swedish prison on rape charges.
It was the fear of being extradited to the US, either legally or by rendition, that had him worried.
Remember this was happening around the time when the US was grabbing people off the streets of Europe and sending them to black sites in 3rd countries for torture.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Basically the only country in the world that still thinks it is okay to torture people?
The country thinks that? Or maybe Trump and his deplorables think that.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
His work includes carrying water for Russia and Trump?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
He's wanted for questions. And the charge of rape came not from the women who he is supposed to have raped, but the prosecutor. When it was that shithead who just became justice, you whined holy hell about false allegations of sexual misconduct. Now someone you don't agree politically with is being accused, not so worried. Despite there being no women accusing they have been raped...
Yeah, it's bullshit to claim you're hiding in the UK to avoid extradition from Sweden to the US. I highly doubt the leaked sealed indictment dates to this period.
Julian Assange is a terrible human being, who has everything coming to him.
BTW, you lot know that in addition to being a traitor, he's also a child abuser too?
Sorry about your "hero".
ill take black ops assassins for 500. trust me the only reason it has not happened is because everyone would know they did it,
How the heck was that moderated as "Insightful"? Even for today's Slashdot, that's a bit of a stoop. I wonder if any of the comments are coming from people who have read any of the books about WikiLeaks or even today's story in question.
Assange did start with an interesting idea. However he is basically a nutjob and he basically set himself up to be used and abused. He peaked out several years ago when he achieved useful idiot status. Before that, he had actually done some interesting stuff that was on the edge of journalism, but he never developed any mechanisms to deal with the incoming data, so it ultimately became a GIGO operation for anyone with garbage to propagate. While WikiLeaks had some credibility, it was useful to feed him garbage, but now that he lost the credibility, no one actually cares what Assange does.
Notwithstanding, I doubt the useful idiot defense is going to work if they manage to get him into a US court. His best hope might be to seek the trial now and hope he can get the conviction thrown out when Trump tweets some idiotic and prejudicial thing. Except for the problem with the new judges out of Leviticus.
Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
You're not real big on that continuity of government thing, are you? Are you seriously proposing that every civil servant should be replaced by every incoming new Administration? Are you aware that Trump still—after nearly two years—hasn't filled half the appointments that he already needs to fill?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Wait, you mean the UK wasn't spending millions of pounds a year to surveil him around the clock just to return him to Sweden to answer questions about some vague sexual assault case that felt about as authentic as an episode of reality TV????
Shocked...I'm just shocked I tell you...
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
So this particular conspiracy theory was right all along.
It's not a conspiracy theory if the only people who think it's *not* true are idiots like AmiJoJo.
Anyone who thinks the UK was spending millions of pounds a year surveilling Assnage around the clock just to return him for questioning on some vague sexual assault case in Sweden were deluded morons to begin with. It was pretty obvious to anyone with half a brain that the intent all along was to extradite him to the U.S., and that the whole Sweden case was just a honeypot operation. They just wanted to get him on a plane before he could find asylum in some country that isn't a U.S. lapdog. And if it weren't for Ecuador having an embassy in London, he'd already be rotting in a U.S. prison (or worse, being held indefinitely in Guantanamo).
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
Assange is not useful. America has no loyalty, Trump less so. It's all about usefulness.
Assange was always expendable. This is regardless of any actual crimes.
Mind you, that's true of any government or political figure. People into politics generally can't be trusted. People who know what's good for others is automatically a control freak who cannot be trusted. Same goes for idealogues.
Don't trust any of them.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
You're cute if you think Trump's the only President who ever considered torture.
I tend to rant.
No, actually, it *does* prove the GPP wrong, your attempt to hide it behind a slight change in phrasing notwithstanding.
BTW, I imagine that death by ingestion of polonium or nerve agent would be quite unpleasant, rather like, well, torture, for lack of a better word. Don't you?
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
So were those who deployed him illegally. His deployment violated military law as he was deemed mentally unfit.
So were those who posted passwords on post-it notes on secure computers, violating military law on such information.
So were those who knowingly gunned down journalists and committed other acts of terror in violation of the Geneva Convention and the Hague Convention, plus US military law.
Yet you defend those traitors.
There can be only one law. A person cannot be guilty for embarrassing others. If they are innocent, so is he.
US military law explicitly protects whistle blowers and those who refuse orders that violate the law.
So legally Manning is protected by right of such laws.
He was insane at the time, so is legally innocent by right of insanity.
The uniform matters for nothing. You must prove guilt in this case, as you must show why medical rulings and DoD rules don't apply. You have not even tried because you can't.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
No, going to Sweden wouldn't have improved his chances of being extradited to the US over staying in Britain. They would have increased the chance of him being investigated for various sexual assault/rape charges, and he might have seen himself ultimately jailed for that, in a Swedish prison, but the idea that Sweden was going to extradite Assange to the US when the UK wouldn't is ridiculous - UK-US relations are far, far, closer and more interdependent.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
Why do people think it would be easier to extradite from Sweden than from the UK?
Except when the story was concocted that Sweden was trying to get Assange from the UK so the USA could extradite from Sweden, the USA wasn't trying to get him. This article says that these preparations started in the past year.
"Because if they charge him, he has to see out the charges first and, if found innocent of the charges, they no longer have reason to extradite him to the USA"
A charge for rape that was claimed to have happened in Sweden would never be grounds to extradite from Sweden to the USA. If charged for a crime in the USA he could have been extradited form the UK more easily than from Sweden.
The claim that the charge in Sweden was purely a setup for extradition to the USA never made any sense.
(Note that I am making no claim about the validity of the rape charge in Sweden, just about the supposed connection between a charge in Sweden and an extradition to the USA.)
FTFY.
I do not want your cheap brainburning drugs. They are useless for work. And I am a working man today.
Translation: you loved him, when he was exposing the evil RethugliKKKunt$. Then, after his exposures of Her Who Should Be President, you began hating him.
Yes, that disheveled billionaire hiding in a 3rd-rate embassy — sold himself...
Funny, how this possibility hasn't bothered you, when he targeted your own political opponents.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Define "rape". My understanding is that he met a girl at a bar and they got it on. She later decided that it was rape because they were both drinking.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Red herring. He is not legally "in" the UK. Legally, he is in Ecuador. That's the whole point of embassies.
Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
Where do you get that Manning was insane?
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
ill take black ops assassins for 500. trust me the only reason it has not happened is because everyone would know they did it,
I don't know. If he did mysteriously turned up dead I'd say it's 50/50 on it being US or Russia that did it. Depends on how it was done. Poison sounds very Russian while random bullet whizzing through the air "oh no how could that have happened" would totally be US all day, everyday.
I figure Russia would probably want him dead too since I'm pretty sure they handed some intel from their office to him to put on W/L. His work with the whole Iraq war was great, but when he got trapped he became a pawn.
Him being right the entire time makes you and every other Assange hater the asshole. Y'all are like a sniveling pack of high school cheerleaders, finding excuses to keep calling the unpopular girll a slut when you know she's never been on a date much less had sex. Does it make you feel proud to lick CIA boots stained with blood from all over the world?
the idea that Sweden was going to extradite Assange to the US when the UK wouldn't is ridiculous - UK-US relations are far, far, closer and more interdependent.
Sweden has actually extradited persons of interest to the US on specious grounds before, while the UK has very strong law government extradition that Sweden hasn't. These facts have been discussed to death in these discussions already, but you somehow either missed them or willfully ignored them. Either way, you're way way WAY off here.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
This brings to my mind the suspicuous dating site "approved by UN" that was used to attack Assange and the UN declaration that defended Assange:
https://www.mcclatchydc.com/ne...
Even if there was rape, which is not proven, it happened in Sweden instead of USA. Why is USA trying to get him extradited to USA?
Your information is not true in practice. Sweden has extradited persons to USA who have been then tortured: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
It was the fear of being extradited to the US, either legally or by rendition, that had him worried.
Remember this was happening around the time when the US was grabbing people off the streets of Europe and sending them to black sites in 3rd countries for torture.
Not only that but in 2013 the plane of the Bolivian president was forced to land in Austria after being denied access to the airspace of France, Spain & Italy on the suspicion that Snowden was on board - a lie that Assange later took credit for.
It's clear that America will not hesitate to strong-arm allies into violating diplomatic norms without more than a whisper of evidence
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
He was in the UK at the point in time when the issue of whether he would be extradited to Sweden and whether that was a precursor to being chain extradited to the USA came up.
He didn't break a law, he published content from a leaker. The leaker broke the law, he just happened to be the only uncorrupted reporter with a media outlet willing to actually do his job and report (aside from Michael Hastings.)
Except when the story was concocted that Sweden was trying to get Assange from the UK so the USA could extradite from Sweden, the USA wasn't trying to get him. This article says that these preparations started in the past year.
TIL there's actually people this ignorant of the world confident enough in themselves to speak. (Who am I kidding, it's not a TIL, it's just fucking sad.)
Regardless of what you think about the motivations behind the leaks or who they benefited the information was real and the truth does not lie. The DNC actively collaborated in a conspiracy to dupe the members of their party and rig the primary, the candidate they promoted took the booty and ran AFTER it was exposed.
Ethically the only appropriate action would have been for Clinton to withdraw in favor of Sanders after this was revealed whether she knew the party cheated on her behalf before that point or not. Personally, I think scooping up the pot anyway after it was revealed she'd been playing with a stacked deck is what elected Trump. Maybe it gets lost in certain political echo chambers but most people actually are not okay with winning by any means necessary.
I pretty sure that Assange would never actually set foot in Sweden. If he walked out of the embassy right now, he'd be arrested in the UK. Then the process to extradite to Sweden would start. However, while in the UK, the US would no doubt apply for extradition, and all the protections that Sweden could promise would count for nothing.
Q:I was listening to a CD in Grip and it sounded horrible! What's up? A:Perhaps you are listening to country music
Really. You use that to describe Assange, who's revealed war crimes and corrupt secrets from both parties in the USA and nations around the world, and not someone like Sean Hannity or Rachael Madcow, who's paid $30,000 to alternate between McCarthyism and gaslighting.
So I have to ask....is your willful dumbfuckery powered by fusion?
Problem with that theory is that the Justice Department didn't prepare to prosecute him them. But now that he most definitely isn't in Sweden they are, so how exactly does this relate to Sweden at all? I would say not at all.
FTFY
No you are completely wrong, the UK extradited him to Sweden under the specific requirement that he would only be tried for the Rape matter. If Sweden had decided to extradite him to the US then they would have broken their extradition agreement with the UK which would have quite grave consequences.
We mostly don't. Lot's of Russian troll accounts pretending to be Swedish does however.
And Hillary winning by 2.86 million while winning the primary by 4 million, having NOTHING to do with superdelegates, somehow supports this "Conspiracy" claim.
Hint: It is the job of the party to put forth the most electable candidate.
so, the reality is this is all about "collateral Murder" and offending the real power center, the War Department.
What would be the pretext in the UK? Assange isn't accused of committing any crimes there and thus they would have no reason to detain or question him. Even now, as the Trump DOJ is proving all of Assange's fears to be completely rational and his haters to be assholes, a foriegn state doing a snatch-and-grab on the CIA's say so in broad daylight would force people to pay attention. And the UK has denied extradition to the USA based on how brutally America treats it's prisoners. Prisoners like Chelsea Manning, who was tortured with solitary confinement for a year and a half.
As opposed to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning on an alleged crime (even though he was questioned and given permission to leave by a prosecutor) and that government has had no problems giving people to the US to be tortured.
Here's a better though....stop buying the transparent pretext for arrest. If Sweden was serious about investigating an alleged rape (really the women only went to the state to ask for an STD test, not to press charges) then they could have sent investigators to question Assange in the UK or remotely via Skype other other video conferencing, as Assange has offered to do. As they've done dozens of other times in other cases since Assange has sought asylum.
Assange has also promised to return to Sweden if they promise not to hand him over to the United States. A promise Sweden could have easily made, given Obama's prolonged torture of Chelsea Manning, and Sweden being a signatory to the UN Convention Against Torture. Which forbids prisoners being handed over to regimes that engage in it.
The fuck are you on about? I think the guy is a crappy human being, but I don't hate him. He's never done anything sufficiently close to personal for me to bother with love or hate. Mostly it has been amusement as he tests everyone's patience simultaneously, when I bother to care at all. I also always thought there was a good probability he was right about fearing falling into U.S. custody.
You, on the other hand, have gone out of your way to make it personal for no visible reason. Kindly go fuck your hat.
How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
I'm a big fan of equal-opportunity leaking. If a government agency doesn't want me to see something funded by my tax dollars, I suddenly become very interested in whatever it is they are trying to cover up.
Frankly, he has a better chance of avoiding extradition to the USA if he is in Sweden than if he is in the UK. Unless you mean he was right not to go to Sweden because he would have been convicted of rape, if he did.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
Nobody isn persecuting him. He's in the Ecuador embassy of his own free will.
Right now the only people who want Assange are the British and that is because he undeniably jumped bail to avoid facing rape charges in Sweden.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
He obviously thinks he is guilty of rape, otherwise he wouldn't have become a fugitive from justice. He would have been a lot safer from extradition to the US in Sweden than in the UK.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
More like putting a termination to the extradition agreement between Sweden and the UK, something no prosecutor in Sweden would want to be responsible for. Also Sweden is a heavy export country so creating such a huge political scandal between the two countries would be seen as very bad by our big exporting companies that have big influence in politics so no few politicians would want to bear the blame for that either. Not to mention the political and economical implications of been seen as a country that cannot be trusted to honour agreements.
The point was perfectly clear the first time. You have a pathological need for Assange to be a "crappy human being" - despite the lack of any reasoning or evidence whatsoever - because if he's not, then you sir, are the piece of crap masquerading as a human. You and every other tool engaging in mindless character assassination.
Says the ratfucker who has nothing but baseless personal smears.
Ok, so on that note do you have any information where I should pick that up that paycheck from CIA?
Back then there was no talk about the Justice Department preparing prosecution but "Assange and others were being investigated by a federal grand jury in Alexandria, Virginia" that's apples to oranges if anything.
His doctor classified him as such and prohibited deployment. This was published by the military at the time. Don't blame me if you don't follow events.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
No, treason is a specific charge. He was not tried on a charge of treason. And, as the Birmingham Six can testify, being found guilty isn't the same as being guilty.
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
As I was channeling Nowhere Man, peddling in a stationary space dimension and changing time reference, the TV monitor above the bike was tuned to CNN and the crawler quoted someone as saying, "Trump administration has arsonists and firefighters. He's getting rid of the firefighters."
I don't lean political, but this does address your point about lack of appointments.
The arsonists are the holdovers from the Obama administration that the Trump team has no time to replace.
It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
"What would be the pretext in the UK? "
The same as extraditing from Sweden.
A lot of people here seem to be confused about the basis for extradition: it's about a charge in the country the person is being extradited TO, not a charge in the country they are being extradited FROM. Any charge in the country being extradited from has nothing to do with the extradition, and may in fact interfere with extradition as that country may want to process their charge first.
Quote from DoJ spokesperson in 2013:
“The problem the department has always had in investigating Julian Assange is there is no way to prosecute him for publishing information without the same theory being applied to journalists,” said former Justice Department spokesman Matthew Miller. “And if you are not going to prosecute journalists for publishing classified information, which the department is not, then there is no way to prosecute Assange.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com...
Is that supposed to be in favor of your point? What they're doing now is proof he was right, nothing you can say will change that.
What would be the pretext in the UK? Assange isn't accused of committing any crimes there and thus they would have no reason to detain or question him. Even now, as the Trump DOJ is proving all of Assange's fears to be completely rational and his haters to be assholes, a foriegn state doing a snatch-and-grab on the CIA's say so in broad daylight would force people to pay attention. And the UK has denied extradition [theregister.co.uk] to the USA based on how brutally America treats it's prisoners. Prisoners like Chelsea Manning, who was tortured with solitary confinement for a year and a half. As opposed to Sweden, where he is wanted for questioning on an alleged crime (even though he was questioned and given permission to leave by a prosecutor) and that government has had no problems giving people to the US to be tortured.
Yes, that is a copy & paste. Because you completely ignored the lack of a pretext for questioning in the UK, the UK's recent refusal to extradite some prisoners to the USA because of how brutal the prisons are, and Sweden not having a problem handing people over to be tortured.
Irrelevant distinction. Freedom of the press covers all of said press, it's hardly limited to reporters. Otherwise the government could haul in anyone from an editor to the owner and charge them with something.
Culpability for what. Publishing information the powerful and corrupt would rather keep hidden? That is the ultimate act of journalism, not covering for war criminals or politicians who rig their own elections.
You mean when banks cut off donations to Wikileaks because the CIA asked them to? The reason Assange was couch surfing in Sweden in the first place?
Funny how this line of sniveling dipshittery isn't deployed against people like Brian Williams or Rachael Maddow, who are paid twenty to thirty thousand per day to propagandize you.
You don't need a pretext in the country you are extraditing *from*.
"Is that supposed to be in favor of your point? What they're doing now is proof he was right, "
My point is that the US was not trying to prosecute at the time that the "extradite from Sweden" story was concocted, and the quote supports that.
The quote supports nothing. Just because you're too blind to read signs around you doesn't make them false, and it doesn't make anyone who can wrong. More likely though, you can read and interpret just fine but you want to lie because you dislike the man.
You most certainly do, when you're putting on a big show of not wanting to extradite someone to the USA when that is in fact your goal. It wouldn't even be the first time Sweden has used such a pretext - with a large helping of interrogating the suspect in solitary confinement but without a lawyer - with the destination country being Denmark rather than the US.