• davelA
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        10 months ago

        I suspect they’d prefer that he die in prison over there, but if not then in prison over here. I don’t think they want to ever take this to trial, because it’s been a farce from the start.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          33
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          They literally dropped all the potentially credible charges they were first going for. Those women in Sweden? Long gone, as of 5 years ago. Hillary Clinton’s emails? Also dropped.

          What really sucks is that the narrative has changed over years, as the facts have been forgotten. People think he’s been in league with Russia, and some even think Russia provided him with evidence against Republicans alongside the Democrat emails, and that he refused to publish the Republican stuff in support of Russia so that Russia’s man (Trump) could get in the White House.

          First off, Russia wouldn’t provide Republican emails if they were trying to get a Republican inside the White House (they didn’t provide any such emails and they did promote Trump). Second, the controversy as about Wikileaks not publishing details of Russian corruption. While this is definitely controversial (and frankly something I disagree with), Wikileaks’ reasoning was simply: “Russian corruption is not news, it is to be expected”.

          • poVoq@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            21
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Those two women from Sweden were not prostitutes (and even if, it wouldn’t matter) and have themselves backtracked from pressing charges. They are also victims of this entire farce and have been instrumentalized.

            • TWeaK@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              10 months ago

              Fair point, I meant to change that before I posted. I think I was getting confused with Trump and the prostitutes that peed on him.

    • muntedcrocodile@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      Does the uk not have a law against executions and if so would the not be breaking said law by extraditing him.

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        23
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s exactly what they’re arguing here. However the US is trying to use a non-answer to avoid this, and in the past that’s worked.

    • deweydecibel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      Regardless of any judicial or legal red tape preventing that extradition, are we seriously operating under the assumption that the United States government would execute him?

      • TWeaK@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        26
        ·
        10 months ago

        are we seriously operating under the assumption that the United States government would execute him?

        Legally, UK and EU courts must consider this, because sending someone to a country where they will be executed for their crimes is a breach of human rights.

        By the strict reading of the law, he could be extradited for life in prison. If he was being extradited to be sentenced to death, that would be a no go.

        The US are skirting and pushing the bounds of UK law here. Unfortunately, they will likely get away with it, because the English are pussies.

    • LWD@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t like Julian Assange, but I think that if he were found guilty of his crimes of espionage, that he has already served out more than a proportional sentence in exile.