Over here 70 MPs have signed a letter urging the home secretary to ensure Julian Assange faces authorities in Sweden if they request his extradition (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-47917325). They want Sweden to be given priority so Assange can face possible sex assault charges prior to any extradition to the USA. With the deteriorating trust between the USA and the UK prompted by the president's aggressive and insulting attitude to America's traditional allies it is no surprise that the MPs feel this way.
"Robert S. Mueller III, the special counsel who investigated Russian interference in that election, reported in court documents that Russian intelligence was the source of those emails, which Mr. Assange has denied."
I thought the whole point of the WikiLeaks platform was to allow people to anonymously submit information. If that's the case, then how would Assange know one way or another who the emails came from?
5
Whatever other message this might send, it tells the world when you challenge the established order and its hierarchy, and worse, embarrass them--as has always been true--they will hunt you down by whatever means--lies, half-truth, or just nonsense--till you're over the saddle or behind bars.
But Assange knew this from the beginning. This is just the next step in the process of dealing with same. Let the new deep-swamp sideshow begin.
1
The "Pentagon Papers", which had been leaked by Daniel Ellsberg, were published by The New York Times and The Washington Post.
They should of course have been suppressed and Ellsberg endigted of theft - or?
Double standards based on partisanship is penetrating many of the comments here.
2
Decades from now, if the western civilization survives in some liberal form, this man will be celebrated as a modern day Robin Hood.
5
Wasn't Robin Hood known for stealing from the rich to give to the poor? If so, then who represents the "poor" in his releasing of Democratic campaign emails? Donald Trump?
7
@Eyton Would you say the same if Assange is convicted in Sweden of sex offences including rape?
His extradition,, in addition to being a non-trivial question of British law, will now become a cause celebre in British politics, as Jeremy Corbyn's statement makes very clear. But he'll still stay in jail until, if ever, the matter is resolved. I have no idea how confining that imprisonment might be but I'm not sure it will be any worse than being trapped in the tiny Ecuadorian embassy with no internet access.
But of one thing we may be sure; Assange's prosecution will not stop other whistle blowers from exposing other crimes against humanity.. By this or any other nation The truth will out.
Between Assange and Trump, I'm sick of hearing about either.
3
Don't tell me Mr. Assange is a whistle blower and a journalist! He is a leaker with a narcist's attitude problem.
A leaker is someone who leaks information on a person, an organization or a government and then runs and hides. Julian Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy and Snowden in Russia.
A whistle blower is someone who exposes the wrong doings of a person, an organization or a government and stands and defends what he has done.
Neither Mr. Assange or Mr. Snowden can be called that.
4
Talk about overstaying your welcome. This troublemaker has avoided the law by living in the Ecuadorian embassy for seven years. Now he shows his gratitude by releasing embarrassing information about his host. I hope he rots in jail.
5
I submit that the NYT and other publishers of the Wikileaks info need to take a hard look at their own actions. It was clear as day to me that Wikileaks/Assange released of the damaging DNC emails at a time calculated to wreak maximum harm to the Clinton campaign. Why did the NYT and others allow themselves to be manipulated by obediently publishing the materials on a timing decided by Wikileaks/Assange?
4
Assange needs to tell all he knows, especially Trump-related. There are enough nuggets of information out there, but he is the rope to tie them all together.
4
Let this be a warning to all those who embarrased her majesty, Hillary
In the din abut stolen DNC emails what's forgotten is what they revealed.
The Democratic Party rigged its own primary to deny Sanders a fair chance.
Clinton lied repeatedly about her connections to Wall Street.
And while there are accusations about Wikileaks receiving these emails directly from Russian hackers, there's no proof that they were hacked, as opposed to stolen, and no proof that they came to Wikileaks from Russia.
Unfortunately main stream media erases the distinction between an allegation, which can assert anything and evidence amounting to proof.
Stealing the emails was a crime. But publishing them wasn't. Newspapers publish from secret sources all the time. Unfortunately it's mostly government sources that want to spread information without answering questions about it.
At least Wikileaks simply gives the raw information to the public and lets them decide what it means.
10
I hope Mr. Assange's cat is alive and well.
10
WikiLeaks claims to champion the right of ordinary citizens to learn about misdeeds of powerful organizations. Yet it itself engaged in misdeeds by hacking into computer systems.
Be it the Pentagon, Hillary Clinton's campaign or the National Democratic Party, Wikileaks illegally broke in. It was a break in as real as those of the Watergate era physical break in. The crime is just as huge.
17
Forget the US and leaking (for now). Extradite him to Sweden to face charges for rape. Why does everyone forget the rape charge?
39
@John
Easy - We forget the three Virginia politicians, we forget Trump. Sex just isn't a juicy as politics.
3
This has nothing to do with any hacking, it is simply a vendetta by the national security establishment in the USA in concert with their counterparts in the UK against a prominent whistleblower.
Anyone who successfully challenges this apparatus has to be cut down to size, no matter how.
Everyone knows it, don't pretend otherwise.
71
@Norbert
"Anyone who successfully challenges this apparatus has to be cut down to size, no matter how.
Everyone knows it, don't pretend otherwise."
You're free to have your own opinions of Wikileaks and Assange but please don't presume to tell the rest of us what we should believe or "know." That's painfully condescending, especially coming from someone writing anonymously.
17
@Peter J. Miller
Anonymity is a part of the rules on this page.
5
This guy worked as Russia’s patsy to subvert our election and help elect Donald Trump - therefore messing up our country and the entire world in ways not easily repaired - because of his personal animosity toward Hilary Clinton.
No hero in my book.
10
Trump is uneasy about extraditing Assange, that’s why he says "I know nothing about WikiLeaks". But that’s not what he has said in the past.
TRUMP: "This just came out.
WikiLeaks, I love WikiLeaks!"
October 10, 2016 in Wilkes-Barre, Pa.
TRUMP: "This WikiLeaks stuff is unbelievable!
It tells you the inner heart, you gotta read it!"
October 12, 2016 in Ocala, Fl.
TRUMP: "It's been amazing what's coming out on WikiLeaks!"
Oct 13, 2016 in Cincinnati, Oh.
5
Be respectful of Wikileaks' type of journalism. It may be the only way you'll ever see the full Mueller report.
2
Whatever you think of Assange's/Wikileaks original collusion with Chelsea Manning, it was not as detestable as Wikileaks' collusion with Russia in 2016. I can't see any way to justify Assange's participation with Russia. I do not see Assange as a journalist, I see him as an anti-social anarchist with a dangerous ego; he is probably a rapist too. Britain should not protect him, he must face the charges against him and whatever punishment comes his way.
4
I’d say minimum a year and a half, but if things get complicated, it could be much longer.”
There’s nothing more pathetic than watching a spider caught in its own web struggling to free themselves. Probably thinking to itself, “what was I thinking”.
I don't blame Ecuador for kicking Assange out of its embassy.
It is astounding that Assange--the sheltered man on arrest lists--actually hacked into Ecuadorian government information and also tried to embarrass the President of Ecuador with photos of him at home . He did that to his protectors???!!!
3
Assange: Russian agent. Trump: Russian puppet. USA: Russian satellite. Americans: victims of Russian brainwashing. Did i get that right?
3
The good news is this conman, criminal is sitting in a proper jail.
Instead of what was basically a 5 star hotel.
Hopefully he can rot there.
1
If Assange did not help steal the documents and simply published them, is he in no different position than the NY Times ins the Ellesberg case.
The only thing that’s going to come out this is a big book deal for him.
1
he's in jail. let the extradition drag on for a lifetime.
Much as we want Assange to be extradited to the US asap, it would be more expedient to extradite him to Sweden on charges of rape, sexual assault and coersion. These are crimes. Period.That should clear the hand-wringing about journalism and jeopardy of the First Amendment. Also hacking is a crime not a journalistic process. That makes Assange a criminal whatever the motivations of the Ecquador Government. But I'm not sure that there is an extradition treaty between Sweden and the US but there is one between the US and Great Britain. Bottom line Assange is a criminal and should be behind bars for a long time.
2
All AG Barr has to do is charge Assange with leaking government documents and Britain won't extradite him here. If he goes to Sweden first, it's less certain they'd stand in the way.
Regardless, if Assange's prosecution here threatens Trump while he's still in office, Trump's enablers will twist law and logic to minimize chances for damage. They may say one thing but you can bet they'll do the other. There's plenty of room in Barr's gullet to swallow another canary.
1
If Assange really wants to be known as the transparent journalist, he should start talking about his association with Roger Stone and Donald Trump about now.
6
We need people like Assange and Manning, who like Ellsberg, leak information to the media and thereby shorten wars and mitigate other crimes.
7
Mr. Assange has been hailed by many around the world as a champion of transparency and a casualty of his own success at revealing secrets.
More like prince of extortion.
4
The Great Alan Dershowtz said: “If the New York Times, in 1971, could lawfully publish the Pentagon Papers knowing they included classified documents stolen by Rand Corporation military analyst Daniel Ellsberg from our federal government, then indeed WikiLeaks was entitled, under the First Amendment, to publish classified material that Assange knew was stolen by former United States Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning from our federal government.
So if prosecutors were to charge Assange with espionage or any other crime for merely publishing the Manning material, this would be another Pentagon Papers case with the same likely outcome. Many people have misunderstood the actual Supreme Court ruling in 1971. It did not say that the newspapers planning to publish the Pentagon Papers could not be prosecuted if they published classified material. It only said that they could not be restrained, or stopped in advance, from publishing them. Well, they did publish, and they were not prosecuted.”
3
Trump's claim, which was loud and clear, that he "loves Wikileaks," should be sufficient to make the extradition short, easy, and sweet so that we learn what this love affair was all about.
2
Information must be set free, as in freedom: a concept that America has forgotten. Information asymmetries eventually lead to massive imbalances and instability.
1
The US has the most risk if it took him under the current executive branch government. He could be even more embarrassing to the country and its conglomerates from within it.
Selective distribution of "news" and information as a means of favoring one party over another is not journalism. Assange is not a journalist and should not be viewed as one. His actions amount to espionage and he should be treated as a spy with the agenda to harm the US and its interests.
3
The glee and resentment harbored by Times readers, directed at someone who revealed nothing which wasn't true, is well, remarkable.
And for shaming not you, but official Washington. Bear in mind, the Justice Dept. isn't going after him for what he did to Hillary. It's all the other stuff -- you know, revealing the war crimes we committed.
Next time, instead of blaming Assange, try running a candidate whose campaign slogan isn't, "it's my turn", who, along with her husband, didn't take hundreds of millions in hand-outs from corporate American ("it's what they offered") and whose response to the world-wide standard of health insurance isn't "never, ever".
1
Since the US exalts in its cruelty there is probably nothing at this point that can shame them. Footage of war crimes more likely than not provide them with a rush.
2
In Julian Assange’s case the venue of prosecution can be subject to legal debate. His physical location when he committed a crime of which he now stands accused could be more relevant than the country he targeted.
His extradition will be lengthy and complex. He will first be sentenced – probably to six months to a year – for jumping bail. His fight against extradition will keep him jailed in Britain for years till he exhausts all legal remedies - from the Magistrates’ Court to the Court of Appeal to the Supreme Court — and possibly to the European Court of Human Rights, depending on the transition period after Brexit.
If the Swedish prosecutors decide to reopen the case regarding rape allegations, he will also be the subject of a European Arrest Warrant. As the EAW is established by EU law, it remains to be seen whether Brexit would have an impact on the extradition process.
One high-profile terrorism case dragged on for 8 years before the the Egyptian-born cleric, Abu Hamza al-Masri was extradited to the US in 2012. In 2015 he was found guilty of supporting terrorism by a court in New York and sentenced to life in prison.
Time will tell how Assange will cope with life behind bars. He will have limited contact with the outside world and won’t be able to pull the strings behind the WikiLeaks. His new life will not be as comfortable as the previous years in the Ecuadoran Embassy, where he was free to drink wine, skateboard down the halls and receive guests etc.
2
WikiLeaks isn’t a publishing house as far as I’m concerned, they just sought secrets to leverage for blackmail purposes. Think about it: by not releasing all of their secrets, at once, it seems obvious they’re taking their time to hit up victims for concessions. Maybe not cash directly, but some kind of material influence. The Ecuadorian government probably exercised some control over this (more access to unreleased material?) in exchange for residence in London; until secrets were leaked against Ecuador; now the shoe’s on the other foot, and Assange isn’t such a nice house guest anymore. Whatever.
Some of my acquaintances think Assange is a ‘hero’, by some bizarre definition. To me he’s pretty much like this unknown midnight creeper in my neighbourhood, who skulks around, jiggling all the car door handles, in search of whatever he can find to filch.
Notorious, rather than notoriety.
1
I think the Swedes claim on Mr. Assange comes first since there is allegation of a definite crime. Maybe someone can help me here but I have a hard time jailing an individual because he hacked and disclosed government secrets when I'm sure the US and Russian governments do this to each other all the time. Did he redact information that would put individuals at physical risk as professional journalists would normally do?
1
No hurry. He'll always have something to dread and that is significant punishment in itself.
It is depressing to see many Democrats foam at the mouth at Assange while calling for his head on a platter.
This is not about Hillary Clinton, Trump and the 2016 election. It is about Chelsea Manning and other information release actions that took place before 2012, while Clinton was Sec'y of State and Obama was POTUS. They also concerned atrocities and policies committed during Bush and Cheney.
Assange took refuge in the Ecuadorean Embassy in 2012, and has always declared that he feared this very extradition that the US is pursuing now.
Those Democrats who strangely believe that Assange hacked the DNC emails, Podesta's or Hillary's instead of simply being the recipient and publisher are delusional. That they want him punished for that is a pathetic temper tantrum and betrayal of Wikileaks efforts over the years.
Given H. Clinton's actions and words against Assange while he was forced to flee into asylum and then live in it, one doesn't have to wonder why Assange seems to detest her, and seemed happy to release those emails.
To repeat, this is about actions taken well prior to the 2016 election.
1
@James Barth
Yes and more to come. He will not get away with working for Russian GRU intel to interfere in US elections. Stay tuned.
1
Yesterday we learned that Assange was blackmailing Ecuador. That is, he threatened to release damaging information about the president of Ecuador should that nation no longer provide asylum.
Are those the actions of a real journalist or a genuine whistleblower? Sweden is considering reopening its rape indictments against Assange, and asking for his extradition.
All of the very best people support Mr. Trump.
Assange should be extradited because of his participation in a conspiracy with the Trump campaign and a foreign adversary to steal the democratic election in 2016.
We never go wrong by believing the worst about the Trump Republican administration. Do they hope to catch and kill any stories Assange might tell about what happened in 2016?
3
So where is the Assange indictment for working with the GRU who hacked the DNC and systematically releasing the emails to benefit Trump’s 2016 campaign?
3
I, along with probably most citizens in both the US and Britain, don’t know all the facts regarding Assange. I can only rely on The Press and which story is true. Right now, I’m just going on “feelings” about Truth versus Falsehood. It’s going to take a mountain of clear evidence for me to believe that Assange is a “knight in shinning armor!”
It appears that Assange withheld publication of damaging information about Mr. Correa, Ecuador's president, but published damaging information about politicians elsewhere, including Hillary Clinton. That means he is decisively NOT a journalist of any objective standard higher than that of Pravda. And his whistleblowing, if that is what motivates Mr Corbyn to defend him, is selective of what benefits none other than Assange.
It might "Be a Long, Difficult Process" but it WILL happen!!
1
Jeremy Corbyn's followers should thing twice about his misrepresentation. For the looks of it he has been a bad actor all along, intentionally cherrypicking the "transparency info" that he put out to act as a conduit for Russian interference in the American Election. Encouraging hacking and offering to help break codes is not transparency. See has apparently encouraged hacking of private information of the Ecuadorian president's private photos and emails to his wife and used it in attempted blackmail, marched around the embassy disabling cameras, placing his own devices in other parts of the embassy, bullied embassy personnel with his extremely large body.
His emails re Hillary Clinton, apparently received from Russia, were released daily in the last weeks of our electoral process, eliminating emails which might have cast Hillary in a favorable light. Half truths do not make a free press. In essence, he gave the world the gift of Donald Trump
Corbyn's cynical comments designed to pick up some votes from the fawning and anti-American at all costs followers of Assange and anti-American at all costs, who allegedly used his heavy weight and large frame to rape and abuse women. show us Corbyn as the wry, divisive, duplicitous character that he is.
1
WikiLeaks is not practicing, or even attempting to practice, objective journalism. This is certainly true in terms of what they choose to release and what they choose not to. There are also claims that they use editing and voice-overs to distort some of the material they release.
But practicing journalism badly, basically doing propaganda, is not a crime. So in legal terms the question is did he facilitate illegal hacking or not? If he ends up going on trial it will be up to the jurors to try to separate these issues. And, of course, the judge's rulings during the trial will likely be quite important by priming the jury one way or another. What I've read so far of his alleged crimes seems pretty thin, encouraging someone to hack doesn't strike me as a crime. Perhaps there will be more.
I read many comments by supporters of Senator Sanders in these sections decrying alleged slanted reporting by the Times. I had a hard time seeing the slant my own self but there may have been some. Bur comparing the Times to WikiLeaks as journalistic enterprises it is clear that the Times is immensely superior. Will the left-leaning folks who decried the Times' alleged slanting recognize this and refrain from putting Assange on a pedestal?
I'm all for taking Mr. Assange into custody to see what his involvement was or what he knows about Russian hacking and his involvement in the 2016 election. That said, it gives me pause that suddenly Trump and gang now want to take him onto custody to see what he knows when during the election they loved him and wanted his help. This tells me one of two things... either Assange is in danger or Trump will talk with him to modify what Assange will say. I believe Assange should be kept in a neutral country to get the truth out of him and then deal with him appropriately.
12
@Missy It wasn't just the Trump gang. The sealed indictment was brought under Obama. Hillary Clinton also has been demanding Assange's extradition
Liberty and justice is important to every human being and alas civil rights in 3/4 of the world don’t exist especially in Trumps beloved Russia and Saudi Arabia
We need to understand the good, bad and the ugly in the governments of the world. However with that being stated let us not allow the social media climate to murder the messenger to provide support for the self righteous lie that governments are circulating about the messenger.
Remember the journalists who are murdered defending our right to know. The Washington post journalist who was killed by the Saudis will never be forgotten no matter how much Trump, Jared smile for the cameras.
8
Why is Australia producing such powerful, havoc wrecking publishers as Murdoch and Assange?
8
@Jean
You may well ask and all I can say is neither of them have much in common with the average Australian. Many here have no time for either of them albeit for very different reasons. They both however also struck fertile ground in the US and the UK.
9
@Jean I was thinking the same thing.
We here in Aus constantly ask ourselves that question; both are incredibly intelligent though deeply flawed characters. It must be said however that Assange’s publication of the Collateral Damage video & the mass of data identifying appallingly immoral & heinous behaviour by the United States during recent middle east conflicts has been far more beneficial for the oublic good than any Murdoch activity. We needed to know the nefarious extent State actors would go to hold on to power so now we are aware.
Murdoch on the other hand is driven by the worst venal greed and need for power. The damage his media holdings inflicts on us in Aus is not diminishing; with our forthcoming federal election the blatant lies his media spews is motivating citizens to challenge it at every turn lest we end up like the UK (Brexit) & the US (Trump), both disasters in which Rupert played a major role. The trouble is, his son, Lachlan, is even more hard right than his father. But we’re on to them now...
2
I remember the Times reporting that Assange’s disclosures could endanger many people, unlike the Times which scrupulously vetted classified material before publishing. I do not ever remember reading that Assange's disclosures did in fact cause harm to anyone. Persistent pursuit of Assange will have a great deal to do with harm. If reports of harm were unfounded, there is false information out there which could prejudice Assange’s defense.
9
The Fact That he did not redact the names of the informants bothers. As Does The rhetoric of blaming the Administration for Troops in Iraq or Afghanistan is counterproductive.
I’ve heard this same thing, identifying information was released that imperilled operatives and agents. To my knowledge nobody was identified by name and so we never heard whatever happened to them. But just think, what actual harm can befall someone for something as innocuous as meddling with propaganda posters in North Korea. Do we think murder and torture don’t happen “for real” in certain political spheres?
Also: what is the need for an organization like WikiLeaks, if I cared to I could post sensitive material up online somewhere at any second, on demand, as it were. Seems completely unnecessary to me. Unless WikiLeaks is an organization built to leverage the value of that pack of secrets. How does Julian Assange become a millionaire, with no job, doing no useful paid task for society, other than dealing with stolen secrets? How is this not recognized as a blackmailing operation?
1
@michjas Assisting an overt anti-democratic, corrupt, racist, misogynistic, lying, cheating con-man to become president of the United States by receiving and releasing stolen property on the presidential opponent is most certainly causing harm. If the claim is "freedom of the press," then where are the tax returns, bank records and other documentation of this "president's" crimes?
1
The difficulty with this discussion is that there is more than one distinct question.
To those who insist that this is solely about press freedom, I ask:
Should a journalist be held to the same ethical standards for their political activity as the rest of us? For example, reporting in-kind contributions to campaigns?
If the timing publication and choice of content are determined by the journalist’s personal political leanings, is it journalism or propaganda?
Should a journalist be held to the same ethical standards as the rest of us when it comes to widely publicizing the names of individuals whose lives are endangered by publication?
Is there ever any reason for classifying information held by the government? If yes, then is FOIA not enough to ensure public access when the time is right?
9
War is a crime. Evil is committed by both sides in one.
All governments have secrets that they are entitled to keep for the good of their respective populations.
Wikileaks is the town tattle tale.
5
A new twist on Brexit and some welcome relief for the PM
For those who say they love the way Assange exposed the truth, how about Reality Winner? Remember her? She informed us if Russian interference in the 2016 election...
6
In all probability, Sweden will reinstate charges against Assange, extradite him, and this matter will get kicked down the road like the proverbial can for awhile. The USA has to many trump related distractions for now to deal with another.
3
Two words: Asperger's Syndrome.
1
@RSS is that supposed to be an excuse? it's not. it's much closer to a slander on people with autism.
1
You are using a term that is no longer part of the official nomenclature in mental healthcare. Schizo Typal is the term many would use to describe Assange nowadays.
Assange has too much on Trump. Trump may save him from the US by refusing him entry
1
The extradition will be long but what about the humiliation and suffering of his detainment in the meantme?
1
If Assange didn’t want jail he shouldn’t have jumped bail, and not escaped the EU. Dog the Bounty Hunter jumped bail in Mexico, but then escaped Mexico. If Dog ever gets caught in Mexico, yes, very first thing is he will be detained in jail. It’s not so mysterious or unfair. This happens to anybody who offends the court!
2
Julian Assange is a Russian stooge, and has done serious damage to the US, not least by deliberately helping the Russians elect Trump. Worse yet, he is accused of rape. The accusations by two different women allege forcible rape. It is baffling to me why the progressives who shout me too about Biden's actions, don't seem to care about a credible accusation of rape. The inconsistency is so large it comes across as derangement.
13
You are correct that he has done much to promote Putin's information and disinformation goals in recent years.
Assange is an opportunistic and amoral disruptor. There is nothing noble in his aims and behavior.
2
Secrecy keeps us spellbound. It's human nature to dig for those pictures, documents, to uncover lies, to be able to expose people or organizations and their deceptions....and why is this? Because secrecy, lies and deception are everywhere and intertwined in our politics and corporations and individual lives. This is how the world works and it is dangerous to get caught up in it. There is always the need to have a scapegoat to blame for whatever the need might be at the time. I don't trust any government to be up front and honest and that definitely includes ours.
17
There will be an active debate on freedom of speech and freedom of the press versus the stealing and distribution of top secret information.
I hope that both sides will leave emotions out of this debate and follow the legalities and/or illegalities of the case.
I have no sympathies for Mr. Assange who appears to be one more narcissist in this world, and my only concerns are that the US comes out of this case with our head high up.
7
Missing his services to the freedom of press and public interests is a big loss for us all. WikiLeaks has raised interests and awareness of what our government is doing that may not be in our own best interest. We all benefit to some degree. The end result of WikiLeaks is positive for the people but negative for lies and bad behavior of organizations. We need more and not less of this unconventional way to publish truth.
13
@Usok
Selective distribution of "news" and information as a means of favoring one party over another is not journalism. Assange is not a journalist and should not be viewed as one. His actions amount to espionage and he should be treated as a spy with the agenda to harm the US and its interests.
10
We need him to stop focusing on his personal enemies and sparing his allies. I have no respect for someone who uses blackmail to benefit himself and not others.
10
@BlackJackJacques, you are right in "Selective distribution of "news" and information as a means of favoring one party over another is not journalism. "
Exposing American war crimes is despicable, as it favours the victims over the criminals.
2
Assange embarrassed Deep State Washington DC Political Elites. That is why they turned against him. He did what hundreds of left wing American journalists do all the time : He published stolen documents .
5
@Mark Andrew The difference being that the "Left wing journalists" merely publish the documents, they don't actually go out and steal them. That's the difference between a journalist and a hack. One publishes to inform, and the other to provoke.
11
From the British parliament, more than 70 lawmakers have signed a leter urging the home secretaty to ensure Assange’s extradition to Sweden in case the Chief Prosecutor decides to reopen the rape case, as just now published by the BBC.
I post this since the debate on these commentary pages appears polarised along with respective feelings about Wikileaks. My own feelings are mixed. Wikileaks have done some useful things, sheddng light on NSA’s and other institutions’ dubious practices, but has more recently become the proverbial ”useful idiot” in the hands of Putin, an experienced chekist.
As for Assange, he may or may not be guilty of rape. Whch is something altogether different. Let him be tried here, where I and these women live.
21
Dear friend from Sweden: I agree with you I hope that the muckey mucks can re-open the Chargers for rape against this person; and by the way I don’t know how useful it is knowing that, if you say things that you don’t want to be printed , then you must be doing something wrong
2
Julian Assange, acting as a “journalist” after serving as an extension of Russian intelligence services, routinely sent advice to Donald Trump Jr in the lead up to the 2016 election: “In one of the messages, sent at 6:35 p.m. on the day of the election, Wikileaks wrote, ‘Hi Don if your father ‘loses’ we think it is much more interesting if he DOES NOT conceed [sic] and spends time CHALLENGING the media and other types of rigging that occurred—as he has implied that he might do.’”
27
@Mike W
But what you have got to ask yourself is: Is that a crime?
And the answer is: No
The lack of concern over the rape charges in Sweden is typical of the moral relativism endemic to progressives, who apparently don't believe this accuser in particular, when the perpetrator is overtly anti-American.
6
@LTJ
LTJ's comment is rubbish. Which charge is more pressing is the issue. Having his rape charges prosecuted first would delay the useful part of his apprehension which is to show how deeply he is tied to helping Russia interfere with democracy in the US.
Obviously if the rape charges were to be delayed the greater good context of examining Trumps links to russia should be considered. Then should that fail extradition to Sweden still be useful in removing this nefarious individual from democratic society.
I don't understand your comment on the adjoining articke that "rather than put up a defense Morino acted the victim ".
What defense did he need to put up about having personal photos hacked even if they show him on a luxury holiday, and surely he is a victim.
Or can you only be a victim if you are in a designated "victim" Catagory
2
Perhaps we can get Assange to leak Trump's tax returns and the full Mueller report. Or is he only interested in publishing the DNC's and Hillary Clinton's e-mails?
48
@Alan J. Shaw . He needs some whistleblowers to send the stolen returns and the report to him in the first place. This is how all press, including the NYT, works. The press also hides its sources, and helps with masking sources’ identities. Nothing different from what Assange does. I’m sure he would be delighted to publish Trumps’ dirt. Don’t let your government tell you how it is.
1
@Alan J. Shaw
Wikileaks does not hack. It publishes what insiders leak to it. I am sure if the GOP got hacked back in 2016, those emails would have been published as well.
3
@EC
I guess the GOP did not get hacked, just "spied upon" according to AG Barr, who will "investigate." At the same time, if Assange is criminally convicted, Trump can pardon him as a genuine hero of the free press.
Assange is a hero who helped do nothing more than expose nothing but the truth, uncover the lies and deceptions of our government, from war crimes, to abuses, and corruption. Sad day for journalism.
16
The Russians are freaking out about the possibility. That's a good sign.
14
..it’s a complete waste of time and money / who cares....
1
Assange should get the Nobel Peace Prize for exposing the activities of the U. S..
8
Americans who commit war crimes don’t go to jail. People who expose Americans committing war crimes go to jail.
If the UK was willing to follow the USA into a dangerous, illegal war of aggression against Iraq, a country with no involvement in 9/11 and no connection to Al Qaeda, I doubt it will have any qualms about handing over Assange to be tortured and put to death, like other enemies of the state rounded up randomly around the world and sent to Gitmo in orange jumpsuits and black hoods.
8
Imagine if Assange were a woman! actually it's pretty impossible, because the mindless adoration and credibility given to a white-haired person speaking emphatically is reserved for men.
A woman would have just been considered crazy and forgotten. Ecuador would have never picked her up in the first place.
8
Why does the United States government direct so much focus on Assange? Why do those in power, loath and fear him?
Only one possible reason - a Nuremberg style war crimes tribunal is long overdue for the people who actually hold sway over our country.
Can you think of an example?
6
Assange will not be extradited to the USA. The Trump administration has zero interest in learning more about Russian interference in our election or allowing the FBI to learn about his contacts with Roger Stone and the rest of the folks (Cohen, Mannafort, Flynn…) who put Trump in the Whitehouse.
I fully expect Barr to either decline to extradite him or send the most junior lawyer in the Justice department to the UK to argue for his extradition.
“I love wikileaks – wikileaks is not my thing”, what else do you expect?
16
Wikileaks has released important information to the public. Unfortunately, partisanship now makes the story about who the information put a bad light on. Hillary Clinton of course is the elephant in the room in wanting to prosecute Assange and the discrediting of Wikileaks role (even though the NYT and other media were willing to take in the released cos and publish them, but now are criticizing their "source.") Had damning documents on Trump been published, Assange would be considered a hero.
4
"WikiLeaks published stolen Democratic Party emails, damaging the presidential campaign of Hillary Clinton.
A less biased report might read, "WikiLeaks published internal Democratic Party emails, that indicated DNC favored Hillary Clinton over Bernie Sanders in the primaries."
9
@Michael Munk and that phrase would continue ... "like every American political party always has chosen a favored candidate based upon who they thought could win."
4
@Michael Munk And a less biased report would also continue by noting that Sanders was never a member of the Democratic Party until he opportunistically decided to run the Presidential primaries as a Democrat with the goal of using the infrastructure of the Party to his advantage.
5
@Michael Munk
Bernie is NOT a Democrat. So there's that. The Dems owed him nothing. Zero. Now Bernie has no audience for his ridiculous "free college" theory.
2
Even if it takes another seven years to extradite him, at least he will be sitting in a prison cell, subject to actual rules, rather than living in a cushy embassy suite.
12
@Liz W.
If he makes bail he'll be out on his own recognizance. His passport will have to be surrendered. See, he's innocent until proven guilty.
@Liz W.
Are the soldiers pictured in the Abu Ghraib photos sitting in jail? And aren't those photos a disgrace to America?
Sending him to Sweden will result in more damaging charges. We hate this guy for focusing more on embarrassing his political enemies than fighting secrecy, but I do not think that he should extradited here.
2
It's been forever and a day since I took International Law and Conflicts of Law, but the issue spotting set acquired in those classes alerts me that there is a deep jurisdictional question here. It seems foolish to bother pointing out how the law is supposed to work, but, really, there are limits to who and what the US government can exercise legal authority over.
I don't care for Assange and pity his jailers, but the US prosecution of him has always struck me as far more disruptive to fundamental norms than whatever damage you think he caused with Wikileaks.
4
Feckless Corbyn. One gets the sense that with just a few more major miscalculations, Britain could easily become a client state of Russia or China.
4
Let’s face it, the powers that be, the deep state or whatever we choose to call them will pretty much stop at nothing to take revenge against whistleblowers that expose the hypocrisy, the wrong doings and criminal activity they are guilty of. Press freedom is great when the news is favourable to them but expose them for what they are and they’ll eat their own children if they think it will allow them to get at the person they are hunting.
I have no doubt there was a lot of deal making going in between the USA, Britain and his hosts prior to his very public arrest with what seemed to be a cast of thousands. All those police for one frail man, who is only guilty of not surrendering to the court because he had sought refuge against his oppressors. What a farce it was. I hope Wikileaks has some juicy files yet to be released.
7
He’s in trouble for hacking for the information. And I do not appreciate Australia Criticizing Us.
1
The Washington Post wrote in its editorial: 'Mr. Assange’s transfer to U.S. custody, followed possibly by additional Russia-related charges or his conversion into a cooperating witness, could be the key to learning more about Russian intelligence’s efforts to undermine democracy in the West. Certainly he is long overdue for personal accountability.'
So that's why he should be extradited. Letter of the law or his usefulness to Russia investigation or for being a bad boy. And this, from the paper that made its name courtesy of Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. The US media is deeply conflicted over Assange because it published information from WikLeaks and it will cite the First Amendment. How convenient. So, the US government is likely to add a few charges once Assange is in US custody. Sounds like due process, doesn't it? I think he's a deeply flawed and narcissistic individual and he, no doubt, did exhaust the goodwill of his hosts, but what he deserves as a dysfunctional person and the conduct of the US government in prosecuting him are not the same thing. If his legal team are good they will make his extradition proceedings all about the US government and its conduct and thus the US government all by itself will turn Julian into the martyr he does not deserve to be. America the Bully yet again. As for the Australian government, how they must wish the UK had given Assange safe passage to Ecuador. They don't want to know about Assange.
3
Even if he published material to disclose war atrocitities etc., that does not mean he is above the law when it comes to rape and coercion prosecution in Sweden. This is not only about press freedom but also about the rights of the potential victim to have charges pursued and if there is sufficient evidence, to have him in court. This is as much a human right as press freedom. Strange that the media, which rightly so has reported about sexual misconduct in many other cases in the me-too-era is less vigilant on this. No, there is no greater good for which to sacrifice prosecution of the alleged conduct, not even press freedom.
7
@Sina
Sure but isn't it up to Sweden to push this?
Considering that Mr. Assange has been incarcerated in London for the past seven years, and may stay incarcerated for the next seven years, our jails or their's really makes little difference. (Yeah, I know, but prisoners oversee crime waves from inside prisons all the time.)
1
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. An honest government has nothing to hide from its citizens, or from the rest of the world.
5
Does the US really want the world to believe its government and intelligence machine cannot be held to account by a journalist?
If so, get ready to never, ever be known as the land of the free.
31
@EC Held to account by the Free Press, yes. By a hacker and opportunist. no.
7
@EC - Progressive Democrats in the USA are speaking out about the fact that Assange was releasing information that was 99% factual and information that the American people had a right to know! It's the big-donor politicians, the millionaire/billionaires backed by global corporations that are trying to spin Assange as a villain. The same way you do not see the Tory Party in support of Assange, but you do have Labour Party leaders speaking in his defense.
In Britain, the leader of the opposition Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, said this week that his country should oppose the extradition of Mr. Assange to the United States — where he faces a charge of conspiring to hack a Pentagon computer network in 2010 — because the WikiLeaks founder was being pursued for “exposing evidence of atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
Diane Abbott, another Labour Party official, made the same assertion, arguing that Mr. Assange “is not being pursued to protect U.S. national security; he’s being pursued because he has exposed wrongdoing by U.S. administrations and their military forces.” - as reported today in the New York Times.
9
@John Warnock -- and where should an alleged crime against the US Gov. be tried? I would concur with past-practice. "Two recent, high-profile cases could point the way for Mr. Assange’s defense. The American authorities sought the extradition of Lauri Love, a British man charged with hacking into dozens of United States government computer systems, and Stuart Scott, a banker charged with currency manipulation.
In each case, a judge ruled against the defendant but the decision was overturned on appeal, partly on the grounds that the alleged illegal acts occurred in Britain, which meant any prosecution should take place in Britain." - as reported in this New York Times article. I do not think putting Assange on trial is the correct path. But if that is the path, then Britain is where the "crime" occurred and where the case should be on trial.
2
Whether Assange is ever extradited, and the record doesn't look good for him, he is in custody. This is when his lawyers can trade his full cooperation for a more favorable legal position. I'm certain more than just the FBI and Department of Justice have an interest in how WikiLeaks has acquired information and the extent of Russian influence. And, Manning is still in jail refusing to testify to a grand jury about Assange. I somehow doubt Julian will be as concerned for Chelsea.
24
At least Assange is in a cell for the foreseeable future. May it be a cold and uncomfortable one. Hopefully, the Brits won't grant him bail given his history.
Let it take 20 years for them to continue to argue over his extradition, and justice will be served.
37
Fortunately British judges decide these things, and not politicians or disgruntled Americans. The Brits are currently not predisposed to President Trump, his thuggish Secretary of State, nor his war mongering National Security advisor. What goes around comes around
16
Twenty years without an indictment or trial? That’s quite extrajudicial of you.
7
@RT and let MI6 interrogators have a go at him regarding his role in Brexit propaganda and his alliance with Russia, including his challenging the UK's accusation that Russians poisoned a former Russian spy in the UK.
Assange was never a journalist. He was a thief, blackmailer, and Russian spy.
Let's start calling hacking what it really is: burglary. It should be no less a crime than when someone breaks into my home and steals my computer.
5
He will never be extradited.
There are simply too many prominent lawyers,too many people in the media and too many world renowned organizations either supporting him or having a vested interest in his freedom and justice prevailing.For were he to be extradited to face this absurd trumped up manufactured charge, it would have serious consequences for all the media,all journalists and the free press everywhere.
Whatever you might think of the man as a person,the reality is he and Wiki Leaks have provided an invaluable service to people around the world and their founding and work has encouraged a whole new raft of publications,sites and organizations to also hold those in power and those in government accountable,not least by bringing corrupt and criminal actions to the eyes of the world.
24
Every step in Assange's arrest was a violation of international law.
Regardless of the decision of the Ecuadorians, the British police had no right to enter what is sovereign Ecuadorian territory.
The United States has no jurisdiction over Assange, an Australian citizen who has no obligation to obey via long distance the laws of the US.
The ruling class, parroting law and order, has no respect for its own laws when the exposure of their crimes is threatened.
19
@Jerry Engelbach
This may all be true - But would it - does it - mean that if one is injured by someone from a remote jurisdiction, one has no redress at all?
1
The Ecuadorian ambassador invited the police in - there was no unauthorised breach of sovereign territory.
8
@Jerry Engelbach
The Ecuadorian government invited the British police into their London embassy in order to get Mr. Assange out. "After 2,487 days in the embassy, the 47-year-old was arrested after Ecuador revoked his political asylum and invited Metropolitan police officers inside their Knightsbridge premises, where he has stayed since 2012 to avoid extradition to Sweden over sexual assault allegations which Assange has always denied."
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/apr/11/julian-assange-arrested-at-ecuadorian-embassy-wikileaks
He might not have run afowl of the US govt if he had not worked to hack into its Defense Dept computer files.
Trump ought to be careful what he asks for. What if he's also extraditing evidence of a direct pipeline to Putin?
9
@Charles Coughlin Have you heard? There are underground prisons in Virginia where the sun never shines.
What type of legal system comes up with a secret sealed indictment? Particularly when there is no high crime such as treason. Legal process has to be transparent. The American extradition procedures will hopefully be thrown out by a British Court with the contempt it deserves. British Law and US law are fundamentally different, and as Assange’s activities did not occur in the US he should not be extradited. the British do not do Presidential pardons, plea bargains and the other crazy aspects of the American Legal systems, and appointments to the Supreme Court are not to partisan hacks
39
@Robert In the United States, Treason can only be a crime if the United States is in a state of war. This is due to a provision in the US Constitution.
In the nuclear age, America hopefully will never declare war with Russia. But does that mean traitors and spies get a free rein?
However, during peacetime, there are equally serious crimes related to espionage, stealing secret government information etc. - those are the crimes that Mr. Assange is likely to be charged with.
If someone opens my postal mail by breaking into my house and publishes the content on the Internet, I would want that person arrested. Hacking into DNC emails is no different.
America has not declared an official war since the end of the second world war. Yes, the entire Vietnam war happened without an official declaration of war.
But the cold war continues.
A journalist cannot break into DNC headquarters and steal paper copies of emails, and expect lack of prosecution- Electronic hacking should be no different.
7
@Robert Sealed indictments are routine and are part of the legal process in most countries. There is absolutely nothing nefarious about their use. Assange's conduct in conspiring to steal thousands of documents belonging to the United States government clearly "occurred" in this country! Under your odd theory, the United States could never prosecute criminals unless they were physically in this country. Obviously, such theory would allow cyber criminals to commit crimes without fear of apprehension. It just does not make legal or logical sense.
9
@Robert
They don't have to be on American soil to be considered a crime.
Assange allegedly aided Manning even if he wasn't on American soil at the time, a crime that even Manning admitted being guilty of. That is what the US is contending. The defense has been, he was a journalist, an apple response to an orange.
The Russian hackers indicted by the Mueller findings were never on American soil either.
6
Beware of US criminal charges morphing into some elaborate Rico scheme carrying multiple decades in prison as punishment for this cad. The British can't rely on the honesty of American prosecutors to limit their charges to those now pending. That their Attorney General now says official spying was perpetrated by anti Trump elements in the Government gives you a window into their sense of integrity.
6
Mr. Assange very likely, and may this come up in a Court of Law, cooperated with Russian agents to denigrate and destroy Hillary Clinton's campaign.
Regardless of the merits of a transparency campaign revealing Iraq war material, Mr. Assange's cooperation with Russia against the Democratic candidate, timing the release exquisitely to remove attention to Mr. Trump's grab-em tape, shows he abandoned any ethical constraints of journalism and that he pursued Hillary as a public vendetta, thus ruining Wikileaks as an impartial source.
He probably thought Mr. Trump would feel indebted to him and would protect him... Mr. Assange's own self-aggrandizement blinded him to the fact that he is a liability to Mr. Trump.
42
@Yoandel,
"...he abandoned any ethical constraints of journalism..."
I fell off my chair laughing at that. Thank you for the lighthearted interlude.
6
@Yoandel knows that "Mr. Assange very likely, and may this come up in a Court of Law, cooperated with Russian agents to denigrate and destroy Hillary Clinton's campaign." - sure, and he he almost certainly started the Vietnam War too, not to forget World War I and the 1812 war.
Provide evidence or stand exposed as a government stooge.
3
It may not be quick, but it is inevitable.
Assange is a criminal, and he will pay for his actions.
13
@Bubo, really?
Which crime has he committed, except for exposing the many atrocities, war crimes, crimes against humanity committed by the US?
1
I did a 180 on this guy. Like a lot of commenters here I thought he made a courageous stand for government transparency and accountability. But when he interfered in the US election - about which there is no dispute - to damage Clinton’s campaign, he exposed himself for what he is: a petulant child with no legitimate agenda beyond disruption. Sweden, US, UK, I don’t care where. He can rot.
130
@Stevenz, "But when he interfered in the US election - about which there is no dispute" - did God tell you this, or do you have some evidence for your claim?
3
@Stevenz
Clinton wanted to "drone" him. And no, she was not kidding. She made herself an enemy.
But what was one more body among the tens of thousands she helped kill.
3
First and foremost - try proving A gave B information on decrypting passwords, knowing the information would be used illegally.
Common Knowledge About Computers is rampant in the US - to the point people fail to understand that “hacking” a computer system means either improving it with grace and elegance (see Steven Levy’s book “Hackers”, about the Second Computer Revolution and the creation of Massachusetts’ Route 128 Corridor”, the original Silicon Alley, now only a historical footnote, or get a copy of “2600, the Hacker Quarterly” to try to understand what the art form’s all about).
People who break into computers and steal information for profit of any kind, including removal and release of data not their own are burglars. The fact they don’t have to be physically present at the scene of the crime is irrelevant.
They may prove to be great patriots - Daniel Ellsberg was one from the pre-computer net age, providing a good portion of the Pentagon’s “History of US involvement in Viet Nam through 1968”, a 13-volume study of which only one volume and a few other pages deserved to be classified Secret or higher, to the NY Times, which published small portions and its interpretation as “The Pentagon Papers”.
I hope there’s one out there now, who has given not just the entire Mueller Team report, but etabytes (if my memory is correct, that’s 10 followed by 15 or 18 0s worth of letters) of information on which it was based to respectable members of the Fourth Estate.
Please Do!
5
Assange is innocent until specific relevat facts and intent proove his guilt in the court of law beyond reasonable doubt. I find it strange that an accessory or an advisor to a burglar would get five years. That is because the national securiry establishment, that likes to spy on you or ruin you, does not want to be spied on even when they are lying or violating civil or constitutional rights of others. That is dangerous. The US' extremely divisive politics is now penetrating the judiciary...This will turn the US into a third world country like Ecuador , where asylum is easily revoked when corruption in the executive office is revealed by the asylee, or like India where feudalism, misogyny and elitism dominate the judiciary.
12
With Assange's notoriety, it's hard to stay focused on the indictment itself, which seems quite limited and tangential. Here it is: giving advice to (conspiring with) a government employee with job access to a restricted government internet site about how to access the site from an anonymous account, which advice didn't work. It's not clear the Brits will find this sin worthy of extradition, nor that a conviction would be a slam dunk.
Even people who despise Assange should be able to see that this is a rather meager pretext for all this legal fireworks. Assange is clearly a political target. And if he is ever extradited he might be offered a chance barter for his freedom by giving up valuable information on his network of contacts and sources. That could end up being the real can of worms.
9
@woofer
I wouldn't be surprised if Assange has a bunch of nice and juicy exposures of American politicians of all parties, CIA and FBI.
Fine me more than $10 and face the wrath of the people when they find out what you've done.
1
I believe Trump has called for the execution of people like Assange, and that American law can demand the death penalty for espionage and/or treason.
The EU does not allow people to be extradited to countries where they're likely to get the chop.
5
@pepys The extraditing country can agree it will not seek the death penalty. Such agreements are quite routine. There is no bar to his extradition.
@shep, The extraditing country can agree it will not seek the death penalty. That's true.
Would you trust a country, which slaughtered at least 150,000 Iraqis and gunned down several of Reuters employees and kept it a secret until exposed by WikiLeaks?
1
@pepys
Assange isn't a US citizen, hence cannot commit treason here.
1
That the U.S. penalty for helping to find a password can be five years in prison is enough to tell any reasonable person that the U.S. justice system is not within international norms of fairness.
32
@abo
"helping to find a password?
you mean when someone publicizes private confidential communications?
that kind of "helping"?
1
It's pretty obvious that the Assange indictment contains some politically motivated statements that will need to be removed by the defense. These are so blatantly obvious that you almost have to wonder if they were put in there on purpose to confuse or delay the extradition proceedings.
Specifically, items 9 and 23 mention the Linux operating system, and imply that it is somehow a special code breaking mechanism. The Linux operating system, of course, does not include any code breaking mechanisms that can't be done using Microsoft Windows or the Apple OS-X operating systems. Mentioning Linux is both immaterial and irrelevant to the charge.
This kind of politically motivated content in an indictment would most likely be removed by the defense as 'surplusage'.
According to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure › TITLE III. THE GRAND JURY, THE INDICTMENT, AND THE INFORMATION › Rule 7: The Indictment and the Information: "(d) Surplusage. Upon the defendant's motion, the court may strike surplusage from the indictment or information." "Note to Subdivision (d). This rule introduces a means of protecting the defendant against immaterial or irrelevant allegations in an indictment or information, which may, however, be prejudicial. The authority of the court to strike such surplusage is to be limited to doing so on defendant's motion, in the light of the rule that the guaranty of indictment by a grand jury implies that an indictment may not be amended."
9
Given the deranged state of affairs in US and Britain, we should not be surprised to see that instead of deportation Britain will ingratiate itself to Trump; the two governments will work a deal which will result in Assange moving into a nice suite at Mar A Lago; in a near future he will play golf with Trump and perhaps broker a US Russia Brotherhood for good measure...
22
@Nicholas
Assange is no friend of Trump, nor of anyone else in the US ruling class.
This attempt at a "joke" was deflated before it launched.
10
@Nicholas No, you are wrong. Assange will be deported not to the USA but to Sweden to face sex offence charges including rape. With Trump's attitude to the USA's traditional allies it should be no surprise to anyone that this will be Britain's priority.
1
@Nicholas..LOL
No wonder Corbyn is so despised and traduced in right wing US media. Here is a potential U.K. Prime Minister who speaks truth to power.
Assange is a target of the Deep State and journalists envious of his fortitude and popular support. Corbyn can see what the establishment media in America can’t — or won’t.
50
@ Michael And yet , despite the Tory mishandling of the Brexit debacle, the Tories are more popular as a party, and Theresa May more favored as party leader, than Labour and Jeremy Corbyn. Looks like his leadership is dooming Labour to life in opposition.
9
Funny how the late night comments on this article are so much supportive of Assange than the earlier daytime ones in another article. By a huge margin. It's almost as if they are being posted by people in a different time zone. Like St. Petersburg.
15
@Benjo wrong. Most are by American patriots who are glad to have found out about the war crimes of their government. HRC lost because she was a bad candidate who ran a terrible campaign, not because of leaks.
10
The 2010 Manning-Wikileaks documents included a quarter million US state dept cables from US diplomats all over the world. This exposed many good people living under oppressive regimes people who trusted and communicated with the US department. The same State Dept which has been cut to the bone by the current admin, damaging US diplomacy, a fact we rightly lament.
99
@Craig H.
The war in Iraq killed at least 150,000 innocent people. The justification was that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, which turned out to be a lie.
In addition, our military and intelligence services captured often-innocent people and tortured them to death.
Assange may have exposed many good people, but he also exposed many bad people.
21
@Craig H.
When at Manning's trial, the Government lawyers were given a chance to come forward with proof that people had died as a result of the leak, they had nothing.
2
If I were a betting man - he will never be extradited.
Britain has become the first and the last refuge of scoundrels, thieves, crooks and folks attempting to escape long arm of the law.
I am in India just now.
India has been pursuing extradition of three crooks who swindled banks here big time - like in millions.
All live in UK - in very expensive and palatial homes. They hire the best lawyers money can buy. The lawyers shop for judges who they are friends with.
India pursued one for 4 plus years and gave up as British courts find every reason not to extradite.
In the other case, a British judge even asked India questions on its jails. India had to fly its officials- complete with powerpoints etc to show the judge his cell.
Then, the courts asked about medical assistance.
And so, it goes.
There is a reason why Russian thieves go to Britain more in numbers than Europe.
They have little fear of extradition unless Putin gets to them in some other way.
Mr. Assange is going to be living in London - possibly Mayfair - at British tax payer expense - as he will request police protection.
And he will get it.
36
Mr. Neil, you hit the bull’s eye.
3
@Neil
Only an unobjective person would compare a financial banking criminal who defrauded India crores of Rupees , hiding in England, with an activist journalist and publisher who wishes to speak truth to power. They are not one and the same. Hiding a bank fraudster fugitive was wrong by England. Assage is a different case. Because it involves the US don't get too excited and compare apples and armadillos.
6
@ExhaustedFightingForJusticeEveryDay Explain to me what preparation or product makes Assange a journalist? Or WikiLeaks a publisher? Using stolen information to hurt people seems a shady business, whether you're Julian Assange or the US Government.
6
The amount of time it will take isn't the problem. The problem is what he will be brought to the US for. Unless the charges change now, there is very little to bring him to trial for. The vast majority of the truly egregious things Assange is said to have done will simply go unprosecuted - which, it may well be, is one way for AG Barr to further protect Trump.
---
Things Trump Did While You Weren’t Looking [2019]
https://wp.me/p2KJ3H-3h2
3
Julian may be a spoiled child, but I doubt he's a complete fool. Surely he knew this day would come and he's prepared,for it by stashing some seriously disruptive documents as his "get out of jail cards". Trump's taxes? Videos from a Moscow hotel? Roger Stone emails. I've got a feeling Assange is gonna crate much more havoc now than he ever has.
64
@HBH,
I bet you’re right about that.
That would be cool if this lead to the release of Trump’s tax returns.
Now I’m getting my hopes up, never a good idea in these strange times.
12
@HBH
I bet he has already read the Mueller report.
Does the nytimes not care about the violation of international law that Ecuador crossed by arbitrarily revoking political asylum that the UN determined and continues to reaffirm as legitimate and necessary to prevent political retribution? And Here I had been raised to believe that the NYtimes cared about international human rights — pick up the slack on the global perspective please, lest you reveal yourselves to be naked State media/American propaganda
27
Ecuador’s revocation of Assange’s asylum was hardly arbitrary, he was basically evicted. I cannot say that I blame them, rather than be grateful for Ecuador’s being gracious enough to spend sorely needed resources to grant him protection he behaved like a freeloading squatter. I doubt that international law mandates that political asylum include maid service. He gets no sympathy from me.
21
As opposed to naked Kremlin propaganda, perhaps? Strange how Assange never published any information about the corrupt and oppressive Russian oligarchy. Why do you suppose that is?
10
@Amy Raffensperger I don’t have sympathy for Assange. But I do have respect for the UN, ICC, Intenational Law and Human Rights broadly, and Equador removing his political assylum when the UN has deemed it legitimate and necessary is not good. Neither would be the UKs violation of its own precedent to not extradite folks for petty, unsubstantiated hacking crimes — Maybe just me in this thread, but I have more respect for the bases of international law than I do for the American Security State and it’s attendent Imperial clients. RUSSIA does all sorts of bad stuff for sure, but they are simply not on the same level as the US in terms of scope of power and scope of abuse. It saddens me deeply that we can’t as a polity keep things in perspective, and focus on the actual problems facing us, the issues that undergird the horrific Trump presidency — like systemic corruption/international money laundering in the real estate industry — or perhaps the influence of corrupt foreign lobby — like for Saudi,UAE, and Israel.
1
Even Hillary Clinton has said that "Assange must 'answer for what he has done'
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/apr/12/hillary-clinton-julian-assange-arrest-wikileaks
10
@Amy
"Even" Hillary Clinton?
The darling of Wall Street?
Of course she said that. She's part of the establishment.
9
@Amy
Hillary Clinton should answer for what she has done -- supporting a war in Iraq which led to the destruction of a stable, secular middle-class country, with the death of at least 150,000 innocent civilians, including women and children, and handing it over to religious terrorists.
If I were at that meeting, I would have asked her whether she actually believed that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, or whether she merely voted to allow the war for reasons of political expediency.
15
@Amy
She meant, "done to me". But actually, she did it to herself. Nobody has ever denied that the content of the leaked e-mails was authentic. The criminal is not the person who reveals the truth, but the person who fears the truth.
14
This is a very tricky 1at amendment issue which needs full and serious (i.e. Not politicized) attention. Damn the torpedoes ...!
2
@Eve Waterhouse You're right. It's very tricky. On one hand, some Wikileaks publications of classified or secret information seem to clearly deserve 1st Amendment protection (ex. the exposure of civilian killings in Iraq and Afghanistan including video of the obscenely callous disregard for life and the most minimum standards of legal lethal engagement of Army helicopter pilots who senselessly gunned down several of my former Reuters colleagues on assignment in Iraq. On the other hand, Assange and Wikileaks, while claiming journalists' 1st Amendment privileges showed little of the proper restraint or editorial caution required to balance the privacy rights of the owners or subjects of leaked and often classified documents against the public's right to know. A bit of judicious editing or redaction could have prevented leaking of information that put lives at risk without limiting the public's knowledge of wrongdoing. As for many of the State Department cables, the damage to U.S. diplomats ability to obtain reliable and confidential information from foreign sources far outweighs any value in the leaks themselves. The means by which the Clinton campaign's e-mails were obtained and released looks more like willful or feckless efforts to help Russia undermine our 2016 election than an act of a free press in a democracy. With the issues already politicized, I fear a trial in the U.S. could lead to new curbs on press freedom. Frankly, I hope he stays in the U.K.
7
I elect representatives to decide what should be classified information and what shouldn’t. Just because someone declares himself a journalist shouldn’t give him the right to deal in stolen property and publish material known to be classified.
100
Your representatives were demonstrated to be committing crimes in the revealed materials. Someone who exposes criminal activity is a whisteblower, and it is the job of journalists to expose the truth.
50
@Barb Campbell
Really? So you are comfortable when your representatives distort the truth and lead us into one illegal war after another? I should think you would be grateful someone ( a journalist ) would have the courage to expose the lies.
54
@Barb Campbell - in that case, we would still be fighting Vietnam.
28