Good for him - he’s less innocent than folks like Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden but a heavy prosecution of him would definitely have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers. Did he release things at politically convenient times? Yes. Should that be illegal? Fuck no.
2016 Assange was a very different person than who he was in 2009. The espionage charges relating to the Chelsea Manning leaks were always bogus, but his involvement with the Trump campaign solidified him as a huge asshole in my mind.
Even back then, WikiLeaks was telling trump to claim the election was rigged and stolen. These are not the actions of a whistleblower, and it’s clear he was not a whistleblower (or working with whistleblowers) during this period and likely a mouthpiece for Russia to sow division in the US.
Agreed. Assange is not the good guy in this. No one is in this.
but a heavy prosecution of him would definitely have a chilling effect on whistle-blowers
As if the last decade plus of his life were not enough for that. Better than a life sentence, yeah.
This is a real win for Biden. Despite all of Trump’s praise for Wikileaks, he did nothing about Assange.
Of course, this wouldn’t have happened if it wasn’t an election year, but it’s still a win.
If only our politicians fought as hard for things during the non-election years too.
This shit is so frustrating.
YOU apathetic fuckers don’t PAY ATTENTION when it’s not an election year.
Stuff is still happening when you aren’t looking at it.
Apathetic voters are too stupid to have developed an understanding of object permanence yet.
…especially once they’re serving their* second term.
[edit] they’re, their, there
In my opinion, absolutely. His legal exile lasted far too long… I think most people won’t even know this happened unless the late night shows pick it up.
I wonder how many people even remember who he is without a refresher at this point. The general public’s memory is short.
deleted by creator
why so much downvote…
This is right, right thing to do and the motive called out is likely true…
If you disagree, please state your reasoning.
I guess a lot of people just got feelz about this one lol
You’re right, the President should basically do nothing in the year before an election. Everything must be accomplished in the first three years, then we take a break.
Edit: (Assuming POTUS was even involved)
Merrick Garland and his DOJ are absolutely not taking marching orders from the Whitehouse. Garland also doesn’t give two shits about politics. Dude’s rigidly ethical
Lemmy dogpiles much more than reddit ever does. All one can do is upvote but it’s moot.
Downvotes should max out at 5.
eta:
pud(proof)ding
Unenforceable wish: no limit on downvotes, but people should have to EXPLAIN them. I often learn more from opposing opinions than from statements of agreement. If I say something unpopular, I want to know WHY it’s so widely disliked. Maybe I’m unaware of something important.
Forced troll feeding. Brilliant idea…
lol good point. I’m a goddam genius!
Ironically, your reply is what I’m talking about. Tell me why I’m wrong! Point out what I missed!
Just saw your edit…
…but I did explain…
…so I’m confused…
It’s ironic because thoughtful criticism is helpful. The “tell me why I’m wrong” bit is a remark meant for others, not you.
I’m pretty sure that sometimes it’s a result of how the voter feels. Other times i’m not so convinced it’s humans voting.
All this extended conversation about all the downvotes and not a single person responded to the reason I gave for downvoting right up there. Merrick Garland’s DOJ absolutely does not care about politics, and the implication that this guilty plea has to do with the Biden Admin wanting to influence the election in November is fictional.
As of now 19 folks responded with upvotes. The lack of comments is because you nailed it and nothing else needed to be said.
…because we weren’t responding to you?
This seems like a big deal.
Now the right will hate Assange lol
Legendary. That’s him cleared in Sweden, UK, and the US. Apparently they’re considering letting him return to Australia (his home country) as well. Godspeed, Assange!
deleted by creator
Thats the catch, he has to fly home in a Boeing.
A whole new meaning to defenestration.
Im just imagining him being sucked out a window like a scene from Final Destination or something.
haha oh
“Cleared” is an interesting way to describe “pleaded guilty and sentenced to 62 months in prison.” Dude just already served 5 years.
With time already served
Yes, that’s what I said
Meanwhile, they have an orange beanbag presidential hopeful spilling the beans to the whoever around the world and he gets millions of dollars of support, literal legal immunity from anything and 1/3 of the country want him to become their Cheeto leader in Mountain Dew.
Hey I like mountain dew
That’s because that orange beanbag seated three associate justices of the Supreme Court, 54 judges for the courts of appeals, 174 district court judges, and three judges for the United States Court of International Trade.
Even worse, citizens want to let him do it again.
To be fair, Biden has seated almost as many judges in his term, so that has balanced out at the lower levels. With the very important exception of the Supreme Court.
There’s also the important point of Biden not committing crimes, like those that the commenter mentioned, and having those charges heard by one of his own appointed judges. Appeals from Trump’s other cases can potentially end up with one of his appointed appeals court judges, or ultimately be heard by the newly conservative Supreme Court, as you pointed out.
I mentioned it because that’s the notable difference between Assange’s and Trump’s ability to live above the law.
deleted by creator
Please step into my secure toilet to see the nation’s secrets.
I still can’t believe that fucking happened and people just go on ignoring it
Hey, to the positive, less than 1/3 of the country. First, if you look at vote numbers versus total population in previous elections, as well factoring in as the total population including those that can’t vote for various reasons. Then, factor in that the party of shit nazis is disenfranchising remaining R voters at lightning speed, the party is massively in debt in some states and basically ceasing to exist, more of the insurrectionists continue to go to prison, the rest of the crazies end up doing something stupid and get arrested…
Things are looking up as that fraction heads towards 1/4 and hopefully they’ll go back into their stinky rotting little hole where they belong. Their Russian troll daddies just make the presence look larger and more present than they really are.
I’m glad he is finally free and I’m always thankful to anyone who exposes war crimes and whistleblowers.
Watch them arrest him the second he lands.
If I were him I’d never set foot in the US again.
Great seeing far more sensible comments here compared with c/technology
Always suprising to see more on a whistle blower than the guys that actually did the war crime.
If Assange wasn’t in US territory when revealed classified information, why is he being judged by the US?
Was not the US should be judging the one/s who filtered the information and not who publish it?
Anyone involved in a crime committed on US soil can be charged with the crime.
Do you suppose hacking your computer should be legal provided the hacker is in Russia?
If it’s legal in Russia, they should not extradite.
If I post this picture to VK from my home in the US, should I be extradited to Russia for it?
You can certainly be charged in Russia.
Extradition is another matter.
Assange personally hacked the alleged computer in US soil? Cos as I see it he published classified information from outside the US so my question would be, you can be judged for publish classified information of the US even if you are not a US citizen? As far as I know the person/s accountable for the crime are ones who probably right now are working for the US govt…
Original allegations suggested that russian operatives supplied wikileaks with the docs
So it should be a problem with Russia, no?
I guess they committed the “crime” but how is US supposed to prosecute that with out looking limp dick?
The US alleges that Assange was part of a conspiracy to hack computers in the US, ie he was not just a passive receiver, he was involved in planning the hack.
The superseding indictment alleges that Assange was complicit with Chelsea Manning, a former intelligence analyst in the U.S. Army, in unlawfully obtaining and disclosing classified documents related to the national defense. Specifically, the superseding indictment alleges that Assange conspired with Manning; obtained from Manning and aided and abetted her in obtaining classified information
Damn, do we have ourselves a glowie here lol
I didn’t say I think he is guilty. But the charges against him aren’t what everyone seems to think.
Man… What is US trying to show here? That they can drum up fake charges on people?
We got it! Nobody doubted it. We are all quacking in fear!
It just looks pathetic at this point. Fuck it hound him some more! why do I give a fuck.
It just looks like a desperate exercise of coercive power!
I don’t know what is going on here. On the one hand, I don’t trust Assange. On the other hand, I really don’t trust the Trump DoJ. Especially since they indicted Assange after the Obama DoJ concluded he hadn’t broken the law.
A trial would have been interesting.
u/@zabadoh@ani.social explained how
the reason is that the US can exercise such authority in practice with any consequences.
a bigger concern here is his native government’s limp dick response tbh
aint he from AU?
the US can exercise such authority
Many countries have the authority to prosecute crimes that occur on their soil even if the perpetrator is outside the country. Including Assange’s native country.
The foreign interference crimes apply to conduct that occurs in Australia. So, if the perpetrator was in Australia at the time they engaged in interference, then prosecuting them would be relatively straightforward, provided there was sufficient evidence. If an offender is outside Australia at the time of the interference, they could still be charged with a crime.
I don’t understand the point you are trying to make?
AU is not prosecuting here
The point is that the US is not unusual in prosecuting people in other countries. Australia and others do the same thing.
Who did AU prosecute like this?
Point I was making is that AU is failing to protect its citizen who is being harassed… BTW ;)
Australia, like the US and other countries, does not generally shield suspected criminals from prosecution.
And that’s regardless of whether the person is actually guilty. Just ask Amanda Knox.
US courts can still try him in absentia, i.e. if he’s not present in the courtroom.
If he’s in a country with an extradition treaty with the US, e.g. the UK, he can be extradited to the US for the trial or with a conviction.
No, the SCOTUS has made clear that you cannot be tried in abstentia.
This case requires us to decide whether Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43 permits the trial in absentia of a defendant who absconds prior to trial and is absent at its beginning. We hold that it does not.
