Julian Assange is arrested by British police

[Cookiegod]

"He'll have his day in court." ... and yet you've already decided he's guilty. So will whatever jury wants that.
And the judiciary system in the US is one of the, though by far not the only, broken things there.

[Gaidin]

"He'll have his day in court." ... and yet you've already decided he's guilty. So will whatever jury wants that.
And the judiciary system in the US is one of the, though by far not the only, broken things there.

And you've decided he's not guilty so...fair's fair?

Look, dude, go read the full thing: https://www.lawfareblog.com/document...nge-indictment

Here's the key parts that say the US Attorney is saying he did more than just receive classified information from a whistleblower.

COUNT ONE
14. The general allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 13 are re-alleged and incorporated into this Count as though fully set forth herein.
15. Beginning on or about March 2, 2010, and continuing thereafter until on or about March 10, 2010, the exact date being unknown to the Grand Jury, both dates being approximate and inclusive, in an offense begun and committed outside of the jurisdiction of any particular State or district of the United States, the defendant, JULIAN PAUL ASSANGE, who will be first brought to the Eastern District of Virginia, did knowingly and intentionally combine, conspire,
confederate and agree with other co-conspirators known and unknown to the Grand Jury to commit an offense against the United States, to wit:


(A) to knowingly access a computer, without authorization and exceeding authorized access, to obtain information that has been determined by the United States Government pursuant to an Executive order and statute to require protection against unauthorized disclosure for reasons of national defense and foreign relations, namely, documents relating to the national defense classified up to the "Secret" level, with reason to believe that such information so obtained could be used to the injury of the United States and the advantage of any foreign nation, and to willfully communicate, deliver, transmit, and cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same, to any person not entitled to receive it, and willfully retain the same and fail to deliver it to the officer or employee entitled to receive it; and


(B) to intentionally access a computer, without authorization and exceeding authorized access, to obtain information from a department and agency of the United States in furtherance of a criminal act in violation of the laws of the United States, that is, a violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 641, 793(c), and 793(e).


(In violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 371, 1030(a)(1), 1030(a)(2),1030(c)(2)(B)(ii).)

PURPOSE AND OBJECT OF THE CONSPIRACY
16. The primary purpose of the consPiracy was to facilitate Manning's acquisition and transmission of classified information related to the national defense of the United States so that WikiLeaks could publicly disseminate the information on its website.


MEANS OF THE CONSPIRACY
17. Assange and his co-conspirators used the following ways, manners and means, among others, to carry out this purpose:
18. It was part of the conspiracy that Assange and Manning used the "Jabber" online chat service to collaborate on the acquisition and dissemination of the classified records, and to enter into the agreement to crack the password stored on United States Department of Defense computers connected to the Secret Internet Protocol Network.

Here's the funny thing about your post about the "broken" US judiciary system. People seem quite happy when it's knocking down Trump's immigration BS. But once some famous dude might have done something illegal in furtherance of some famous act?

OH NO!

Sorry, that's not how it works.

Let's not forget that what is misleadingly described as hacking to gain access to secret government networks, was essentially brought to the surface, only after the Trump administration decided to abandon its predecessor's prudent and more sincere policy, and to escalate the campaign of persecuting Assange. What WikiLeaks allegedly did was to encourage Manning to provide more classified documents and to offer advise (futilely) about how he could protect his anonimity. Neither of them looks out of the journalists' ethical code to me, while the latter is actually considered as an absolutely necessary obligation for every media that actually respects the rights and interests of its source. The goal of gaining access to the database was not collect more secrets about Washington's naughty adventures, but to mislead the authorities, by logging in to the computer under a different account. Therefore, the accusations seem quite flimsy, but also reflect the desperate efforts of the recent American governments to silence whoever threatens the official version of events.

Is that the best you have Abby? We were helping him break into another account so he wouldn't get caught! That is unauthorized access to a government network. No matter which way you swing it. Will a jury convict depending on how the story is told? Possibly not. Possibly yes. Northern VA is a 50/50 shot because this is a place where this work is actually done and people live with these restrictions and they respect them. A better argument would've been for Manning to just stop sending information and Assange would've never gotten wrapped up in the second account. But you know what? Assange got god damn greedy.

[mongrel]

"He'll have his day in court." ... and yet you've already decided he's guilty. So will whatever jury wants that.
And the judiciary system in the US is one of the, though by far not the only, broken things there.

Of course he's guilty - of bail jumping . a Magistrate sentenced him ffs. Besides which there is no argument to counter that. Why are you on this thread, have you a clue what has transpired? .

Is Julian Assange a US citizen? Did he commit that "crime" in the US? No? Then the US can f right off. They're not the rulers of the world.
Is there actual proof for the password-accusation? No? Then why are they so desperate they've forcibly incarcerated Chelsea Manning again for refusal to cooperate with their accusation?

99% of the charge is normal journalism. No sorry, what used to be normal journalism. I know that research isn't a thing people are supposed to do anymore.

He may have committed some offences in Sweden. If he has, lock ........him.......up.

[Coughdrop addict]

"He'll have his day in court." ... and yet you've already decided he's guilty.

He released the documents. He didn't have legal access to them. Did he help Manning steal them? Very likely. You're right, I can't say for certain until after a trial, but this looks like a smoking gun.

So will whatever jury wants that.

In the US and most western countries a jury doesn't want anything. The jury gains nothing either way if they find the defendant guilty or innocent.

And the judiciary system in the US is one of the, though by far not the only, broken things there.

Ridiculous. Like all western courts US courts require proof of guilt and do, in fact, often acquit. Is it a perfect system? No. Do injustices happen? Yes, as with anything involving fallible human beings mistakes can happen. But to denounce the entire US Justice System as broken solely on the basis it's the US's is nothing more than your prejudice talking.

[Heathen Hammer]

If America had a functioning judiciary system, we'd see most of its political and financial establishment behind bars long time ago. I'd believe Assange could get a fair trial there, if we'd already see Bush and Obama behind bars.

The history of how classified information is received by journalists isn't spin. If the federal government has evidence he actively helped instead of passively received they don't even have to charge him under the espionage act. It changes the game.

Journalist's primary job is to bring information to public's attention. That makes Assange journalist to a much bigger extent then all of American media establishment put together, given how latter is mainly just propaganda workers and not real journalists, with maybe few exceptions.

[mongrel]

Journalist's primary job is to bring information to public's attention. That makes Assange journalist to a much bigger extent then all of American media establishment put together, given how latter is mainly just propaganda workers and not real journalists, with maybe few exceptions.

I'm pretty sure rape isn't in the job description.

[Aexodus]

The chief prosecutor specifically said he was ‘not suspected of rape’

[Gaidin]

The chief prosecutor specifically said he was ‘not suspected of rape’

Ummm...what?

Are arrest warrants for rape just handed out like candy in Europe?

[Cyclops]

Be good for Assange to face his accuser in Sweden, too often in the past high profile people have had rape allegations and actual crimes covered up.

Just want to clarify despite appearances not all Australians travel the world committing sex assaults. Julian and Rolf are exceptions to the rule.

[Coughdrop addict]

Just want to clarify despite appearances not all Australians travel the world committing sex assaults. Julian and Rolf are exceptions to the rule.

Nice try. We all know the kangaroo mafia covers up the real numbers. Anyone who talks is "stuffed in the pouch".

[HannibalExMachina]

Nice try. We all know the kangaroo mafia covers up the real numbers. Anyone who talks is "stuffed in the pouch".

or taken out by dropbears. or the giant spiders.

[Exarch]

Some good legal analysis on Assange and extradition:
https://twitter.com/RickPetree/statu...04236526555136

[mongrel]

The chief prosecutor specifically said he was ‘not suspected of rape’

The prosecutor wanted him arrested on charges of suspicion of rape, three cases of sexual molestation and unlawful coercion. Not like you to be coy about foreigners raping Swedes (allegedly)

[Heathen Hammer]

Again, no point in arguing with mongrel since it was pointed out pages ago that allegations against him were dropped 2 years ago, not to mention that accuser was literally a CIA shill.

[Swiss Army Cheese]

Again, no point in arguing with mongrel since it was pointed out pages ago that allegations against him were dropped 2 years ago, not to mention that accuser was literally a CIA shill.

There's plenty of point arguing with Mongrel since he pointed out that the charges "weren't dropped, they expired". You guys just suck at arguing.

What should be pointed out (to counter his counter) is that the Swedes tried to drop the charges but the Brits wouldn't let 'em.

[mongrel]

There's plenty of point arguing with Mongrel since he pointed out that the charges "weren't dropped, they expired". You guys just suck at arguing.

What should be pointed out (to counter his counter) is that the Swedes tried to drop the charges but the Brits wouldn't let 'em.

Thank you Cheese, the voice of reason. The Swedish authorities may lack stamina, but Ass-ange will spend some time in the nick in any event

[Cookiegod]

There's plenty of point arguing with Mongrel since he pointed out that the charges "weren't dropped, they expired". You guys just suck at arguing.

What should be pointed out (to counter his counter) is that the Swedes tried to drop the charges but the Brits wouldn't let 'em.

Among other things, it's been pointed out what feels like a million times at least, that Assange and Equador offered the Swedish prosecution to question him in the embassy, and/or to guarantee him safe passage and to not extradite him to the US, in which case he'd be willing to face his accusers in court. Both requests were always denied.

Everyone who isn't completely retarded knows what that means, and yet (not only) he keeps making that same stupid argument again and again and again, as if nothing happened.

Several members of the lynchmob have also made rather clear what their core motivations are. E.g. mongrel referring to the anti-Hillary slogan of Trumps election campaign by saying: "Lock him up."

At that point at the latest you'd know that reasoned arguments will do nothing, since for them it's about petty revenge. Even though the accusations he's facing currently are 1) very weak and 2) have nothing to do with Hillary.

There isn't a single argument by the war-crime-supporters that hasn't been entirely destroyed. At least not in those parts before I finally wisened up and stopped reading, as my "broken record"-reference was proven right time and again.

If you feel like he's "good at arguing", how about you go through all his posts in this thread, and tell us 1) the average length of his posts (hint: they're very short), 2) a complete list of arguments brought (it's very low), and compare it to 3) the number of posts he's written.

But I don't want to make it look like I'm only going hard on him. I wish all the other lynch fans were as enthusiastic about prosecuting actual war criminals as they are about prosecuting journalists. I know, I know, he's not a journalist to you, but since he fits the official definition of what a journalist does, is often and repeatedly being referred to as such by media outlets across the world, and has won a multitude of journalism awards, I really don't give a about what he is and isn't to you.

What I feel is incredible disgust towards these people. If they were idealists, they'd have even more reason to be angry at the perps. But as the good mob subservient to demagogus that they are, they'll happily go after the messengers.

Instead of being angry at Hillary for doing shady things, they're angry for the guy who uncovered it.
Nixon had to abort his reelection and step down for less.

There really isn't much more to be said. I really don't like being part of an outrage mob. I try not to judge people, because we're humans and all humans are .
But this goes beyond everything and has a concrete, measurable negative, and possibly lasting impact on the world we live in.
You help those bombing the world to and destroying your freedom at home in the process.

[95thrifleman]

There are two facts that are being ignored.

1) Assange committed a criminal offence by breaking his bail restrictions and has therefore been arrested, legaly and within the letter of British law.

2) Britain has an extradition treaty with the USA and has an obligation to consider extradition requests.

[Cookiegod]

There are two facts that are being ignored.

1) Assange committed a criminal offence by breaking his bail restrictions and has therefore been arrested, legaly and within the letter of British law.

2) Britain has an extradition treaty with the USA and has an obligation to consider extradition requests.

It's not being ignored. It has been answered. A multitude of times. Including the last post before yours.

[95thrifleman]

It's not being ignored, it has been answered a multitude of times. Including in the last post before yours.

Yet you suggest that by obeying the laws of our nation we are somehow supporting terrorism? Your words: "You help those bombing the world to and destroying your freedom at home in the process."