Julian Assange

The evidence he has brought to light needs to be the subject of a case against the perpetrators of these war crimes.

Please. His prosecution (for apparently unsuccessfully trying to figure out a password) will make sure similar crimes will not come to light in the future, and that is exactly the reason for his prosecution.

He belongs at the bottom of a cesspit, where he should be in familiar surroundings.

The evidence he has brought to light needs to be the subject of a case against the perpetrators of these war crimes.

Bastard protectors of the bastard perpetrators.

Assange knew of the undercover operations leading to his arrest, and was accessing Ecuador's own security files, despite being denied embassy internet access, etc. (Whilst smearing the walls with his fecal matter).

His behaviour was his own downfall once the previous Ecuadorian presidents protection left the building.

He had people on the outside pursuing UK SS OPs!

Bit uncomfortable that Harry has now accessed our state secret OPs and married to an american influencer

Sorry 4-6 years later I wanted to say (depending on when the offer was made by Ecuador).

BBC: In 2016, Sweden's chief prosecutor Ingrid Isgren travelled to the Ecuadorean embassy in London to question Mr Assange over the 2010 rape allegation. Prosecutors had already dropped their investigation into the sexual assault allegations after running out of time to question and bring charges against him.

Yes, I remember that. Only 3 years later. So, what prevented Sweden from guaranteeing not to extradite to the US for any wikileaks related activities?

You can't say you won't do something when you don't actually know what that something is. If the US had said, "oh actually he committed a murder we just found out about,

What about 'actions related to Wikileaks publications' is unclear? Please.

Another report on a cable published by Wikileaks/Assange, in another episode of our miniseries 'When reporting the crime is more heavily punished than commiting it...':

'A U.S. diplomatic cable made public by WikiLeaks provides evidence that U.S. troops executed at least 10 Iraqi civilians, including a woman in her 70s and a 5-month-old infant, then called in an airstrike to destroy the evidence, during a controversial 2006 incident in the central Iraqi town of Ishaqi...

...autopsies performed in the Iraqi city of Tikrit showed that all the dead had been handcuffed and shot in the head. Among the dead were four women and five children. The children were all 5 years old or younger.'

www.mcclatchydc.com/news/special-reports/article24696685.html

And Ecuador would have given up Assange (and I believe he had consented), if there had been guarantees from Sweden not to extradite for Wikileaks related charges, something Sweden would have been able to do from a legal perspective.

Would they? I mean had the extradition request been made by the US to Sweden at that point? You can't say you won't do something when you don't actually know what that something is. If the US had said, "oh actually he committed a murder we just found out about, can you extradite him?" a prior agreement not to extradite would be unfortunate. And considering how many rapists end up with more and more women coming forward, there's always that possibility.

I don't know BTW I'm asking.

His quoted remarks about the women make him look guilty as sin as far as I can tell.

BBC
"In 2016, Sweden's chief prosecutor Ingrid Isgren travelled to the Ecuadorean embassy in London to question Mr Assange over the 2010 rape allegation. Prosecutors had already dropped their investigation into the sexual assault allegations after running out of time to question and bring charges against him."

Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation into Assange in 2017 because they were unable to proceed while he remained in the Ecuadorean embassy.

But why was that? Why was it impossible for Sweden to proceed? Apparently Sweden had interviewed suspects abroad previously, and in more serious cases. And Ecuador would have given up Assange (and I believe he had consented), if there had been guarantees from Sweden not to extradite for Wikileaks related charges, something Sweden would have been able to do from a legal perspective.

So, why was Sweden unable to do that? If justice for the women would have been the primary concern, this could have easily been done. What prevented Sweden?

Rowan, basically the same words were used in the Reuters article, the two women did not originally report a crime

Andy You seem to be very selective in deciding which details are pertinent.
The inquiry did not/could not progress.
It seems possible that one of the allegations may be investigated:

BBC recent update: 'Julian Assange: Sweden considers reviving rape inquiry'
What is the Swedish investigation about?
Assange was accused of rape following a Wikileaks conference in Stockholm in 2010. He has always denied the allegation, saying the sex was consensual.

Swedish prosecutors dropped the investigation into Assange in 2017 because they were unable to proceed while he remained in the Ecuadorean embassy.

Assange also faced two other charges of molestation and unlawful coercion, but these were dropped in 2015 because time had run out.

Prosecutors will now re-examine the rape case to decide whether to resume it before the statute of limitations runs out in August 2020.

Ms Massi Fritz, lawyer for the alleged victim, said the arrest came as a shock but "what we have been waiting and hoping for since 2012 has now finally happened".

She said: "No rape victim should have to wait nine years to see justice be served."

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-47910820

Creepy chauvinist narcissist. The world moved on whilst he was soiling the walls of the Ecuadorean embassy. I hope he spends time in jail - I don't really care where.

Link: www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/21/why-us-is-out-to-get-assange

Seumas Milne really summed it up well in 2012:

'None of that should detract from the seriousness of the rape allegations made against Assange, for which he should clearly answer and, if charges are brought, stand trial. The question is how to achieve justice for the women involved while protecting Assange (and other whistleblowers) from punitive extradition to a legal system that could potentially land him in a US prison cell for decades.

The politicisation of the Swedish case was clear from the initial leak of the allegations to the prosecutor's decision to seek Assange's extradition for questioning – described by a former Stockholm prosecutor as "unreasonable, unfair and disproportionate" – when the authorities have been happy to interview suspects abroad in more serious cases.

...

The solution is obvious. It's the one that Ecuador is proposing – and that London and Stockholm are resisting. If the Swedish government pledged to block the extradition of Assange to the US for any WikiLeaks-related offence (which it has the power to do) – and Britain agreed not to sanction extradition to a third country once Swedish proceedings are over – then justice could be served. But with loyalty to the US on the line, Assange shouldn't expect to leave the embassy any time soon.'

and this has always seemed to me to be one of those great spy conspiracy stories where people will be embarrassed about the position they took later.

You just described the Russiagate mania. Still waiting for Trump being marched off in handcuffs and tried for treason.

This is not correct. Sweden has very close intelligence and diplomatic ties with the US. It even provides US diplomatic services in some countries where the US doesn't have a presence, one example being North Korea.

Of course they do. Sweden is far from God and close to Russia.

Sweden dropped the charges, and the presumption is it was a matter of clearing the path for his release because it is inconvenient for all parties involved, except Assange, but mostly for Ecuador.

If you're an Assange stan, you probably have picked out the parts where the media is upset because 1st Amendment! The 1st Amendment doesn't cover breaking the law, ie assisting a potential leaker break into a safe, carrying out a briefcase or assisting in covering cyber tracks of password tampering. Other parts of the media have covered that, and if there's a trial, the lawyers need to tread carefully (as would the judge) if the 1st Amendment is to be preserved. (Yes, there are issues there).

As for the politics, most "Resisters" are angry at Obama for failing to notify the country about the depth of Putin's efforts to elect Trump. They have also noted that Trump loved WL in 2016, and that Roger Stone was his bestest bud.

Some people can walk and chew gum at the same time.

There is no guarantee extradition will be granted. No guarantee it will not. The charge is for 5 years maximum, the death penalty is not involved, and this has always seemed to me to be one of those great spy conspiracy stories where people will be embarrassed about the position they took later.

Rowan, basically the same words were used in the Reuters article, the two women did not originally report a crime.

If you went to the police to tell them you want to find someone who hit you in the face, the police may tell you that they will help you find the person and that when they do, they can charge them with a crime.

What would you do?

He's a weird creepy guy, but he shouldn't be extradited to the US.

Rowan, basically the same words were used in the Reuters article, the two women did not originally report a crime.

andyoldlabour

Ive just been reading the 2010 Guardian article youve linked above & given the amount of nuanced reporting, Im surprised you've just quoted what seems an uncorroborated claim and allegation about two women by someone with clear understandable bias eg Assange's lawyer.

www.theguardian.com/media/2010/dec/17/julian-assange-sweden

"Both complainants say they did not report him to the police for prosecution but only to require him to have an STD test. However, his Swedish lawyer has been shown evidence of their text messages which indicate that they were concerned to obtain money by going to a tabloid newspaper and were motivated by other matters including a desire for revenge."

www.reuters.com/article/us-wikileaks-assange-charges/special-report-std-fears-sparked-case-against-wikileaks-boss-idUSTRE6B669H20101207

"The women went to the police together after they failed to persuade Assange to go to a doctor after separate sexual encounters with him in August, according to these people, who include former close associates of Assange who have since fallen out with him."

There's also superseding indictments to come, it seems. Better wait for those.

Sure. Nothing as entertaining as watching both sides, the #Resistance and #MAGA, both wait for some magical bullet that will resolve it all for them and restore the US to its mythical, unbesmirched greatness.

And in the case of Assange, they're even both on the same side.

There's also superseding indictments to come, it seems.

Better wait for those.

Thank you for all the analysis going on here, from all sides. Eye opening and brain bending, as always.

Manning was encouraged to obtain the password of a co-worker with higher clearance and security privileges.

No. Not according to the indictment.

'The other key fact being widely misreported is that the indictment accuses Assange of trying to help Manning obtain access to document databases to which she had no valid access: i.e., hacking rather than journalism. But the indictment alleges no such thing. Rather, it simply accuses Assange of trying to help Manning log into the Defense Department’s computers using a different user name so that she could maintain her anonymity while downloading documents in the public interest and then furnish them to WikiLeaks to publish.'

theintercept.com/2019/04/11/the-u-s-governments-indictment-of-julian-assange-poses-grave-threats-to-press-freedoms/

I very much doubt Assange's prosecution will at any point tie back to the 2016 leaks and the Mueller investigation (not least because the US apparently still refuses to prosecute for merely publishing info).

We'll see how that statement ages, but I am pretty confident.