Assange's Prosecution
That's an incredible video. I think it lays out a very clear argument that the hacking charges against him are trumped up and flimsy, and will never carry in court. If that video is accurate, and there truly is nothing more to the case than what has been presented, Assange's defense attorneys should have no trouble, should it ever go to trial -- which looks very unlikely due to the UK continuing to block extradition. (Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.) But very little of this is new. We are just rehashing the same old discussions, and fear mongering about what might have happened had he actually just showed up in court for his various accusations. I know there is a great deal of skepticism that he would get a fair trial in the US. A lot has been made of the hundred plus years of jail time when you add up all of the accusations. But Chelsea Manning was facing 135 years in prison, and served only seven -- for directly leaking information in a way that I think we all agree as far more serious than what Assange is charged with. And that was military court, which is far more strict than Assange would face. I'm not sure why we assume by default that Assange is going to face a greater sentence than Chelsea Manning, given that the case against him is so much weaker, and his actions are so much easier to defend on first amendment principles. It's entirely possible that had he just showing up in court, he would be a completely free man running WikiLeaks in the clear. Regardless, the main reason I'm continuing this conversation is I'm trying to get anyone to specify precisely what they would like done that is different than what is happening. Not some vague hand wavy outcomes that we prefer, but who specifically should do something different, and specifically what. Do you want a law changed? Specifically which one, and how? Who do you want to change it exactly, and what is the process for asking them to do it? Or is the conclusion of all of this discussion is simply to ask Biden to drop the case? If so, say that. How should we convince Biden to do it? Have you written him a letter or taken any action whatsoever to actually constructively encourage the outcome? Or are you hoping that Biden reads your mind and just intuitively senses that's what you want? It's easy just to complain, and there's plenty of that being done here. It's hard to actually fix things, and that's what I'm trying to encourage you all to participate in. I think Jim Bell has done the best job yet of linking to this very succinct summary of the issue, which drives the conversation forward constructively. I am going to tweet this out and ask the Biden administration to drop the case against Assange to clear the way for him too face Justice in Sweden. What are you going to do? David
https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1412690988024307717?s=19 Alright Karl and Punk and all the rest who claim to give a shit about this, what are you going to do about it, or does your anger only extend to complaining on this list? David On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, 1:27 AM David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
That's an incredible video. I think it lays out a very clear argument that the hacking charges against him are trumped up and flimsy, and will never carry in court. If that video is accurate, and there truly is nothing more to the case than what has been presented, Assange's defense attorneys should have no trouble, should it ever go to trial -- which looks very unlikely due to the UK continuing to block extradition.
(Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.)
But very little of this is new. We are just rehashing the same old discussions, and fear mongering about what might have happened had he actually just showed up in court for his various accusations.
I know there is a great deal of skepticism that he would get a fair trial in the US. A lot has been made of the hundred plus years of jail time when you add up all of the accusations.
But Chelsea Manning was facing 135 years in prison, and served only seven -- for directly leaking information in a way that I think we all agree as far more serious than what Assange is charged with. And that was military court, which is far more strict than Assange would face.
I'm not sure why we assume by default that Assange is going to face a greater sentence than Chelsea Manning, given that the case against him is so much weaker, and his actions are so much easier to defend on first amendment principles. It's entirely possible that had he just showing up in court, he would be a completely free man running WikiLeaks in the clear.
Regardless, the main reason I'm continuing this conversation is I'm trying to get anyone to specify precisely what they would like done that is different than what is happening. Not some vague hand wavy outcomes that we prefer, but who specifically should do something different, and specifically what.
Do you want a law changed? Specifically which one, and how? Who do you want to change it exactly, and what is the process for asking them to do it?
Or is the conclusion of all of this discussion is simply to ask Biden to drop the case? If so, say that. How should we convince Biden to do it? Have you written him a letter or taken any action whatsoever to actually constructively encourage the outcome? Or are you hoping that Biden reads your mind and just intuitively senses that's what you want?
It's easy just to complain, and there's plenty of that being done here. It's hard to actually fix things, and that's what I'm trying to encourage you all to participate in.
I think Jim Bell has done the best job yet of linking to this very succinct summary of the issue, which drives the conversation forward constructively. I am going to tweet this out and ask the Biden administration to drop the case against Assange to clear the way for him too face Justice in Sweden. What are you going to do?
David
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 01:34:26AM -0700, David Barrett wrote:
https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1412690988024307717?s=19
this sweden thing has been dropped long ago. why are you so misinformed is this on purpose? https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50473792 this wiki should help you understand better and clear all your misconceptions: https://challengepower.info/tools_to_fight_a_disinformation_campaign
On Wed, 7 Jul 2021 09:26:51 +0000 stef <s@ctrlc.hu> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 07, 2021 at 01:34:26AM -0700, David Barrett wrote:
https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1412690988024307717?s=19
this sweden thing has been dropped long ago. why are you so misinformed
barrett also pretended he didn't know that assange has been kicked out of the embassy two years ago and has since been kidnapped and tortured in an english jail in other words, barrett is a cop AND a troll
https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2016/01/12/reflecting-on-obamas-presid... Whereas President George W. Bush authorized approximately 50 drone strikes that killed 296 innocent people and 195 more civilians in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia, Obama has authorized 506 strikes that have killed 3,040 innocent people and 391 more civilians.
On Wed, 7 Jul 2021 01:34:26 -0700 David Barrett <dbarrett@expensify.com> wrote:
https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1412690988024307717?s=19
Alright Karl and Punk and all the rest who claim to give a shit about this,
I don't use twatter, son. Twatter, just like your site is pure JS malware. If you have something to say post it here, instead of posting a link to your NSA garbage.
On 07/07/2021 09:27, David Barrett wrote:
(Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.)
Perhaps so in actuality, but in law he has already served his sentence for breaking bail. At present he is detained pending an appeal by the US against the refusal of his extradition. Unsurprisingly he is considered a flight risk, and has been refused bail. Peter Fairbrother
It wasn't dropped: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48253343 They did temporarily while he was hiding in the embassy (again, he was hiding from Sweden, not the US -- Obama didn't try to arrest him, Sweden did, and Assange ran), but now that he's out of hiding, it's reopened. David On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, 2:31 AM Peter Fairbrother <peter@tsto.co.uk> wrote:
On 07/07/2021 09:27, David Barrett wrote:
(Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.)
Perhaps so in actuality, but in law he has already served his sentence for breaking bail.
At present he is detained pending an appeal by the US against the refusal of his extradition. Unsurprisingly he is considered a flight risk, and has been refused bail.
Peter Fairbrother
On 07/07/2021 16:58, David Barrett wrote:
It wasn't dropped:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48253343 <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48253343>
I didn't say it was, but Yes, the rape investigation was, finally, dropped on 19 Nov 2019, 6 months after it was reopened in May 2019 as per your link. I believe it can't be reopened again without major hassles in Sweden. Assange wasn't ever detained for more than a few hours on the rape allegations - he got bail, which he famously skipped. Then embassy, arrested again, was sentenced to imprisonment for 50 weeks for breaking bail which sentence he has served, and he is now detained but not imprisoned pending appeal on the US extradition charges. Peter Fairbrother
They did temporarily while he was hiding in the embassy (again, he was hiding from Sweden, not the US -- Obama didn't try to arrest him, Sweden did, and Assange ran), but now that he's out of hiding, it's reopened.
David
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, 2:31 AM Peter Fairbrother <peter@tsto.co.uk <mailto:peter@tsto.co.uk>> wrote:
On 07/07/2021 09:27, David Barrett wrote:
> (Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by > hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- > which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.)
Perhaps so in actuality, but in law he has already served his sentence for breaking bail.
At present he is detained pending an appeal by the US against the refusal of his extradition. Unsurprisingly he is considered a flight risk, and has been refused bail.
Peter Fairbrother
On 07/07/2021 17:31, Peter Fairbrother wrote:
On 07/07/2021 16:58, David Barrett wrote:
It wasn't dropped:
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48253343 <https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48253343>
I didn't say it was, but
Yes, the rape investigation was, finally, dropped on 19 Nov 2019, 6 months after it was reopened in May 2019 as per your link. I believe it can't be reopened again without major hassles in Sweden.
Correction - it can't be reopened at all, because the Swedish statute of limitations ran out in Aug 2020. Peter f
Assange wasn't ever detained for more than a few hours on the rape allegations - he got bail, which he famously skipped.
Then embassy, arrested again, was sentenced to imprisonment for 50 weeks for breaking bail which sentence he has served, and he is now detained but not imprisoned pending appeal on the US extradition charges.
Peter Fairbrother
They did temporarily while he was hiding in the embassy (again, he was hiding from Sweden, not the US -- Obama didn't try to arrest him, Sweden did, and Assange ran), but now that he's out of hiding, it's reopened.
David
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021, 2:31 AM Peter Fairbrother <peter@tsto.co.uk <mailto:peter@tsto.co.uk>> wrote:
On 07/07/2021 09:27, David Barrett wrote:
> (Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by > hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- > which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.)
Perhaps so in actuality, but in law he has already served his sentence for breaking bail.
At present he is detained pending an appeal by the US against the refusal of his extradition. Unsurprisingly he is considered a flight risk, and has been refused bail.
Peter Fairbrother
On Wed, Jul 7, 2021 at 9:42 AM Peter Fairbrother <peter@tsto.co.uk> wrote:
Correction - it can't be reopened at all, because the Swedish statute of limitations ran out in Aug 2020.
Hm, I don't think the statute of limitations applies to fugitives. The case was brought against him in the appropriate time; him resisting arrest doesn't mean he's free to go. https://blogs.findlaw.com/blotter/2014/03/fleeing-from-justice-what-can-happ... -david
Though Assange is actually imprisoned in the UK for skipping bail by hiding out in the Ecuadorian embassy for years to avoid rape charges -- which is a completely different matter that still needs to be settled.
False. - The UK bail thing is finished with 50wks sentence served. - The SE things were all recanted and or dropped. Only thing worse than States, are lying States Apologists. And dirty leftists propping known liars and recanters like CNN and NYT. Among lots of other bullshit.
But Chelsea Manning was facing 135 years in prison, and served only seven
How convenient to the claim that "justice system is fair and right" to not mention she was sentenced to 35 years, that the 7 was lucky, that both she and the UN reported she was tortured, drove her to suicide multiple times, fined her hundreds of thousands of dollars, locked her away in solitary multiple times, violated her right to free speech and incrimination by forcing her to testify, etc... and that after Obama himself tainted her trial, after the long nightmare that he and "justice" put her through, that asshole didn't even offer a word of apology, but that he was "comfortable" with it and that he felt himself "appropriate", while at the same time issuing another threat against and trying to cancel the Freedom of Speech. And the Republicans rhetoric toward her was as vile as the system. All for a little much needed Sunshine and Free Speech exposing and embarassing the crimes and ridiculousness of the State.
I think we all agree
Whoever "we" is, they probably don't, but nice try, lol.
Manning was facing 135 years why .. assume ... Assange is going to face a greater sentence
Add it up, see if the 175 years the internet likes to quote is correct or not.
first amendment principles.
Prosecutors of Free Speakers probably don't know or care much about the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 5th, or any other either, let alone the US Declaration of Independence, or things that paper has no right over. Chances are they probably advocate for mass censorship, just like Leftists, Democrats, Socialists, Communists, and Biden supporters are doing in this censorship cycle.
written him a letter
Since you like to blast out election influence letters to your unexpecting captive audience telling them to vote for Biden the Murderer, then yes go blast out some letters telling them to write @potus @doj @congress @judicial @media @tech @* to ... #FreeAssange, who just so happened to expose politicians and their Collateral Murder.
"I am going to tweet ... to clear the way for him to face Justice in Sweden."
This latest attempt at slandering Assange already got officially shot down by the SE justice system, same with what the internet noted as US and UK attempts to twist SE into doing a bogus prosecution for them. Leave well enough that after more witness interviews some justice happened to finally stop whatever such abuse. Yet seems people in some "movements" are still trying. There's also legal differences between "charges/charged", "wanted for interview", etc.
participants (6)
-
David Barrett -
grarpamp -
jim bell -
Peter Fairbrother -
Punk-BatSoup-Stasi 2.0 -
stef