[1]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 <[2]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

References

   1. https://twitter.com/dbarrett/status/1412690988024307717?s=19
   2. mailto:dbarrett@expensify.com