Forum menu
Looks like he left Wilson behind
Wiiiilsonnnnn!!!
There’s an angle in the whole wikileaks saga that I’m surprised no one has investigated
I'd be surprised if there wasn't an angle you were surprised hadn't been investigated.
JUST IN: Julian Assange found guilty of skipping bail by UK judge. He will be sentenced in Crown Court, where the maximum sentence is 12 months
That woman is tiny. Wonder what she’s won 🧐
JUST IN: Julian Assange found guilty of skipping bail by UK judge. He will be sentenced in Crown Court, where the maximum sentence is 12 months
And is let off off due to self imposed prison sentence 🤷♂️
Ecuador serving revenge up cold - I really don't think Trump wants Assange getting extradited for a chat with the FBI.
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/07/donald-trump-breastfeeding-tariffs
US conspiracy charge is very narrowly drawn.
I doubt UK gov will do much to block any extradition application.
Will Trump attempt to interfere in any possible extradition? 'I love wikileaks' was his mantra throughout 2016. Today? Wikileaks - don't know much about it.
Is Seumas Milne still boffing Assange's lawyer?
Wait, Seumas Milne is having his evil way with Geoffrey Robertson, who was recently acting on behalf (and what acting!) of another fair haired defendant?
https://twitter.com/ciabaudo/status/1103102580136312832
Maybe they can ask him about this little meeting. One of many that Nigel has conveniently not remembered... (along with other easy-to-forget things like who is paying for your private jets).
Glad it’s not just me that remembers that crazy-legs - thanks for posting the link.
Makes me think WTF is Corbyn thinking asking ministers to oppose extradition, hmmm...another example of Corbyn dancing to Vlads tune.
Makes me think WTF is Corbyn thinking asking ministers to oppose extradition, hmmm…another example of Corbyn dancing to Vlads tune.
Because it's not that straight forward? The US charges are politically motivated after they stupidly put a huge amount of classified and embarrassing material within reach of a huge number of people.
The current charge is that he helped/encouraged Manning to try and crack a password to unlock some files - it's not actually related to the massive dump of info.
Happy to have him deported to Oz, sending him to the US no matter how much of a fairly nasty narcissist he is would be a bad move. It would show the UK just does whatever the US wants in these matters.
Off to the US with him.
Happy to have him deported to Oz, sending him to the US no matter how much of a fairly nasty narcissist he is would be a bad move. It would show the UK just does whatever the US wants in these matters.
And of course deporting him to the US would prove him right.
Personally I am not sure what kind of person he is, or at least was, but a massive successful propaganda effort has definitely affected peoples view of him. The Farage/Trump links came after the establishment had turned the weight of propaganda against him, and he had already been holed up for years, desperate situations can create regrettable mistakes.
If he gets deported then the message is, expose the crimes of Governments and you will pay. The UK has already been compliant in this goal when raiding the Guardian a few years ago trying to seize the Snowdon leaked info.
Makes me think WTF is Corbyn thinking asking ministers to oppose extradition, hmmm…another example of Corbyn dancing to Vlads tune
Perhaps but only indirectly here
If all the Americans have is that he published stuff they didn't want in the open then they can do one.
Assange is a turd, he's been doing Putin's dirty work, would love to see his involvement with farage investigated & he should face any charges coming if the Swedes reopen his case
BUT
Extradition for publishing leaked/hacked information is an attack on free press and we should not be facilitating that
And of course deporting him to the US would prove him right.
It won't do that, and we won't be doing this:
Extradition for publishing leaked/hacked information is an attack on free press and we should not be facilitating that
Because the yanks are well aware of that danger. What they'll do is get him on relatively minor stuff that isn't directly related to journalism of freedom of speech.
That way there will be no controversy and Assange's claim that he'd serve a long sentence will be proved wrong.
Essentially he'll serve a shortish sentence in the US but when you add the 7 years he's been him hiding plus the months he'll spend in uk prison for ducking bail plus any time he spends in prison in Sweden for the rape charges will add up to the best part of 20 years. That plus the credibility loss will be more than enough punishment with little controversy or political fallout.
The last thing the USA want to do is give Assange credibility as a freedom of speech martyr or to prove anything he's said about his likely fat to be correct and they don't need to.
Because the yanks are well aware of that danger. What they’ll do is get him on relatively minor stuff that isn’t directly related to journalism of freedom of speech.
No need to speculate they have released the charge and it's been widely discussed.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-04-12/what-next-for-julian-assange-the-conversation/10999130
It raises questions over the uneven extradition agreement between the UK and US at the moment which is something that needs fixed ASAP.
As mentioned he can fight extradition to both the US and Sweeden, he can be easily deported to Aus. That options seems like the best one for the UK at the moment.
Makes me think WTF is Corbyn thinking asking ministers to oppose extradition, hmmm…another example of Corbyn dancing to Vlads tune.
Then there's Diane Abbot on the radio this morning trivialising the rape allegations. She has a point but voters find rape deeply uncool, it doesn't play well. All she had to do was to condemn the rape *if found to be true* and object to extradition, *if* that extradition is for anything 'freedom of speechy'.
They come across as nutters defending a petty criminal and alleged rapist and I don't think it's accidental. They don't want to win because then they'd be the people in the hot seat making the unpopular decisions that they've been complaining about for 30 years.
LOL @ Nico’s excellent photo comparison .
Are You Being Served (a subpoena )
Personally I am not sure what kind of person he is
If Pamela Anderson thinks that he is OK, then that's good enough for me 🙂
If he could have got the support of Yasmine Bleeth as well, that would have been a slam dunk...
What they’ll do is get him on relatively minor stuff that isn’t directly related to journalism of freedom of speech.
They are trying to get him on conspiring with Manning to hack,
The discussions also reflect Assange actively encouraging Manning to provide more information. During an exchange, Manning told Assange that “after this upload, that’s all I really have got left.” To which Assange replied,
“curious eyes never run dry in my experience.”
https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy
IANAL but that seems tenuous as fk!
As mentioned he can fight extradition to both the US and Sweeden, he can be easily deported to Aus. That options seems like the best one for the UK at the moment.
Speedy deportation to Oz would have been my favoured choice *but* I don't think he can reasonably avoid jail time in the uk for skipping bail. He must serve some time for that which means we'll end up having a extradite him.
They are trying to get him on conspiring with Manning to hack
Yup.
IANAL but that seems tenuous as fk!
That's the other possibility, maybe there is just nothing they can legally and politically get him for. The leaks themselves are too politically difficult to prosecute for and he's done nothing else illegal.
I think the US will still be fairly happy. 7 years in a room plus total loss of credibility, plus jail time in the UK, plus maybe jail time in Sweden for a crime the public have no sympathy for is plenty. The US has won and they won't do anything to turn Assange into a Martyr with credibility.
Then there’s Diane Abbot on the radio this morning trivialising the rape allegations.
She did say that if sweden bring charges he should face them though, did she not?
generally she made humphries look cpmpetent tho, which is impressive
and as the victims lawyer has requested that it be reopened it seems likely they will
I think assange is already a martyr, conspiracy theorists love him, his alleged victims coming in for some horrible abuse on social media, any extradition to america will prove him right
Transcript from outside the Embassy
Mister, you just assured me that I could speak. Look, i'm under what? Gentlemen, this is democracy manifest. Have a look at the headlock here, see that chap over there? he- GET YOUR HAND OFF MY PENIS! This is the bloke who got me on the penis people. Why did you do this to me, for what reason, what is the charge? eating a meal? a succulent Chinese meal. Oh, that's a nice headlock sir, oh, ah yes, I see that you know your judo well. Good one. And you sir, are you waiting to receive my limp penis? How dare - get your hands off me! Ta-ta, and farewell.
Assange is a turd, he’s been doing Putin’s dirty work, would love to see his involvement with farage investigated & he should face any charges coming if the Swedes reopen his case
He's always been an obnoxious narcissist but nevertheless WikiLeaks (which was not originally the Assange vanity project it later became) was instrumental in dragging some very dubious behaviour by Western governments into the open. It's notable however that so little was done to expose the more nefarious goings on of Russia. And also that the GOP has somehow been spared the attention given to the Democratic Party.
I'm not a fan of Assange but it's a bit tenuous the US going after him based on him providing a file dumping ground and saying that directly assisted with the exfil of classified data.
A nation state hack would exfil data via compromised 3rd party external systems to make it difficult to trace but a whistle-blower would likely not have that mechanism at their disposal. There's a grey area when leaking that data really is in the wider public good that an anonymous way to exfil data (e.g. via a wikileaks provided dump location) is needed - although I'm not saying what was leaked was warranted in this case...
@Kimbers which certainly proves that this case should be treated as the separate cases that it is and not trying to punish one offence with the other trial.
The UK has to consider requests from the US and if Sweden ask them too.
These need to be considered for what they are and which is more important.
WikiLeaks (which was not originally the Assange vanity project it later became) was instrumental in dragging some very dubious behaviour by Western governments into the open.
And in its totally scattergun aproach to doing so, exposed sources who's lives were then put at risk. Not that he gave a shit about that.
Plenty of investigative journalists manage to expose dodgy government behavior without potentially getting people killed in the process. Investigative journalists have been jailed for refusing to expose their sources, Assange as good as published their names, left them to be hung out to dry, then moved on to his next act of self-promotion
, exposed sources who’s lives were then put at risk. Not that he gave a shit about that.
https://twitter.com/michaeldweiss/status/1116410686630875136?s=19
Regardless of what you think of Assange, the footage of USA military joyfully murdering civilians and journalists had to be exposed.
And as always with whistleblowers a massive negative PR campaign was launched. It's certainly been successful.
It is always a crime to turn over the unsavoury rock that a government hides its misdeeds under. He should not be extradited to the USA for that IMO.
The Swedish allegations are another issue. I'm not familiar with the detail - is it the same as here?
Regardless of what you think of Assange, the footage of USA military joyfully murdering civilians and journalists had to be exposed.
Despite the way that was done leading to people being killed? If you're a journalist then you have a responsibility to protect your sources. The slapdash manner of what Assange did - just throwing everything into the public domain, unedited - put peoples lives at risk. Something that by all accounts he couldn't care less about
Nice to see Corbyn and Dianne Abbot continue their puerile, sixth form level of political debate by ignoring the blood he has on his hands and rushing to defend him.
He's exposed the American government, therefore he's the good guy, right? Well... no. Its a bit more complicated and nuanced than that.
I think assange is already a martyr,
On this we will just have to disagree. I think he was, and then going into hiding over the rape allegations made him look really dodge is most people's eyes.
conspiracy theorists love him, his alleged victims coming in for some horrible abuse on social media,
No of this does him any credit at all and certainly doesn't support a any kind of martyr status.
any extradition to america will prove him right
IMHO it depends what it's for. As I say the USA will be picking charges carefully to avoid charges that will gain him public support.
IMHO it depends what it’s for. As I say the USA will be picking charges carefully to avoid charges that will gain him public support.
and as I said the charge has been picked already...
The Swedish allegations are another issue. I’m not familiar with the detail – is it the same as here?
NO - what he is accused of is not a crime here. It was sex that was consensual at the time but after the act the complainant retrospectively withdrew consent - IIRC on the grounds he was also boffing someone else so had tricked her into having sex with him
this may be a useful addition to law - but what he is accused of in Sweden would not be a crime at all in the UK
and as I said the charge has been picked already…
I know one (fairly weak) charge has been announced - completely consistent with my view on the kind of politically doable, shortish sentence thing they'll try to get him on to avoid giving him credibility and martyr hood.
However have the US requested extradition yet? Was that the charge written on it? If so are there rules to prevent them extraditing on one charge and then changing or adding charges?
If it really is set in stone as that one charge with a weak case and a worst sentence of 5 years he'd be better off in the USA than Sweden IMHO.
Assange is a slimebag no doubt at all BTW - and IIRC there was a second allegation from the other woman which again would not be a crime under UK law.
Perhaps these things should be crimes under UK law
However have the US requested extradition yet? Was that the charge written on it? If so are there rules to prevent them extraditing on one charge and then changing or adding charges?
Yep he is due back in court on that one, and yes once the charges for extradition are written they cannot be changed or added to.
completely consistent with my view on the kind of politically doable, shortish sentence thing they’ll try to get him on to avoid giving him credibility and martyr hood.
That and espionage charges fall under a political category that means there are more grounds to refuse the extradition - we don't extradite for politically motivated prosecutions - so it's been picked for a few reasons.
If it really is set in stone as that one charge with a weak case and a worst sentence of 5 years he’d be better off in the USA than Sweden IMHO.
At that point things were very different though, once he went in he was not coming out of his own free will unless something changed.
However have the US requested extradition yet?
Yeah, the moment he was in custody the US unsealed a secret indictment they had in place since 2012 and requested his extradition.
Frankly, the man is a knob, no doubt about it. But make no mistake, as he claimed all along, the US Government want him and were always going to demand his extradition without giving much of a shit about the Swedish Charges, given our current predicament and May's desperate need for a US trade agreement, he may find himself in US soil pretty quickly.
But make no mistake, as he claimed all along, the US Government want him and were always going to demand his extradition
I'm sure he was talking about the death penalty or *very* long sentences. Not a maximum of 5 years. I'd also like to see the timeline for this. Who requested him and at what stage. Surely Sweden must have been first. He could already have been in the Embassy when the 2012 charge was issued.
At that point things were very different though, once he went in he was not coming out of his own free will unless something changed.
I'm talking about now, according to this thread Sweden can still ask for him.
what he is accused of in Sweden would not be a crime at all in the UK
In which case he couldn't be extradited to Sweden at all, but this whole pantomime started when his skipped bail to avoid being extradited to Sweden on the grounds that Sweden would extradite him to the US if he went.
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/extradition-processes-and-review
"The judge must be satisfied that the conduct described in the warrant amounts to an extradition offence (including, in almost all cases, the requirement that the conduct would amount to a criminal offence were it to have occurred in the UK,"
Who requested him and at what stage. Surely Sweden must have been first. He could already have been in the Embassy when the 2012 charge was issued.
It's all in the article from the ABC I posted, in the event of 2 extraditions date does not matter the UK gets to choose.
I’m sure he was talking about the death penalty or *very* long sentences. Not a maximum of 5 years.
If he went to Sweden then they could resubmit a different charge
It was 2018, not 2012.
NO – what he is accused of is not a crime here. It was sex that was consensual at the time but after the act the complainant retrospectively withdrew consent
tjagain I think you have got some facts wrong there.
"Mr Assange, who was aware that it was the expressed wish of the injured party and a pre-requisite of sexual intercourse that a condom be used, consomethinged unprotected sexual intercourse with her without her knowledge"
Mr Assange “by using violence, forced the injured party to endure his restricting her freedom of movement. The violence consisted in a firm hold of the injured party’s arms and a forceful spreading of her legs whilst lying on top of her and with his body weight prevented her from moving or shifting”
Mr Assange “deliberately consomethinged sexual intercourse with her by improperly exploiting that she, due to sleep, was in a helpless state”
For all of these if the conduct had occurred in England and Wales it would amount to sexual assault.
All of the above are from
OK
I remeber rather more to it than that that puts that account somewhat in doubt but I didn't look it up to check as you clearly have done