back to article UK Home Office signs order to extradite Julian Assange to US

UK Home Secretary Priti Patel today signed an order approving the extradition of Julian Assange to America, where he faces espionage charges for sharing secret government documents. Assange led WikiLeaks, a website that released classified files including footage of US airstrikes and military documents from the Iraq and …

  1. A Non e-mouse Silver badge

    Appeal

    On what grounds are they going to appeal? That Julian is too special to be extradited to the US?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Appeal

      Well you could suggest that if it's an offence in the UK then UK law should get first dibs....

      I actually think the US law is on shaky moral ground. It seems unreasonable to expect a foreign citizen to respect your privacy when they aren't even in the country.

      1. sreynolds

        Re: Appeal

        The moral authority ended with Priti Patel. She could have let him remain by calling the BS case against him. And if uncle sam doesn't like his crimes being made public, maybe they should not commit them in the first place.

        1. cyberdemon Silver badge
          Coffee/keyboard

          Re: Appeal

          Moral Authority? Priti Patel? <cough, choke>

          Home Secretary is a position of Moral Authority. But Priti Patel is only Interested in Authority, not Morality.

          In fact, she seems to relish in the suffering of others - especially the Syrians, Ukranians & Iraqi Kurds who have genuine claims of asylum

          Making her home secretary was like asking Dr Mengele to run an immigration, detention & policing system.

      2. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

        Re: Appeal

        Assange is charged with assisting an American violate the security of American systems.

        Had he been charged with assisting a Brit violate the security of Brit systems, then he should be tried in the UK, but he wasn't.

        There's no question that the offense is an offense under both US and UK law....

        BUT unlike in the UK, in the US he has some massive advantages, although the chattering classes won't acknowledge it. His biggest advantage is a thing called New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713 (1971), which makes it bright-letter law that publishing classified material is not a crime.

        So the charge is not related to that, but a conspiracy to hack into systems: the allegation is that Assange supplied Manning with tools and techniques to break into systems. This is a very tricky thing to prove, because it's entirely legal to chat about how one might do something, and the prosecution has to show that one was actively promoting and encouraging the scheme.

        (And it should be remembered that *if* he is convicted, he will be jailed in Australia, not the US.)

        1. Zolko Silver badge

          Re: Appeal

          Assange is charged with assisting an American violate the security of American systems.

          hold-on: some years ago it was said that it was because he jumped bail ! Do you intend to say that the UK government lied about that ? Or are you making this all up and hope that the Internet will not remember ?

          1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

            Re: Appeal

            Or are you making this all up and hope that the Internet will not remember ?

            Nope. You're presumably misremembering (fake news!) what really happened. So initially Assange was looking at rape charges. To avoid those, he jumped bail and holed up in the embassy. When he left the embassy, he was arrested for the bail offence. Then the US said 'actually, we'd like a chat' and so rather than Sweden wanting to habeus his corpus, the US did instead.

            So now here we are, with Assange having exhausted all his legal options (I hope) and may finally be leaving these shores. But then there'll probably be the question of if he gets PNG'd, or ever tries to return, especially now he can claim family ties with the UK.

            I'm also curious just how vindictive the US will be, ie they could just tie him up in jail (obvious flight risk and serious charges) for a couple of years, and then deport him to Australia.

            If only he'd come clean and cleared his name on the original charges, we'd not be calling him an alledged sex offender and he may have enjoyed the sun these last few years.

            1. Jaybus

              Re: Appeal

              Well, there's also the tiny matter of Manning having stated during her court martial, to which she (actually he back then) pleaded guilty, that Assange had agreed back in 2010 to help with cracking an administrative password on a military system, and subsequently did so.

              Her sentence was commuted by President Obama in 2017 and she almost immediately became a candidate for the 2018 Senate race in Maryland, which she lost. She was jailed again for a year in 2019 for refusing to give testimony to a federal grand jury in Virginia regarding the Assange case. In 2021 she was hired by a Swiss cryptocurrency startup to conduct a security audit. Her book is slated to be published in 2022. You really can't make this stuff up!

              Anyway, had he just agreed to go to trial in the US back then, he too would have been pardoned by Obama and be running for public office and publishing his own book by now. Think about it! He's essentially already been imprisoned longer that Manning, and she pleaded guilty.

              1. Ian 55

                Re: Appeal

                Well, most of the 'yes it would be rape' guy's imprisonment was because of skipping bail and hiding in an embassy for years before annoying his hosts enough that he ended up being actually imprisoned for skipping bail..

                1. PabloBee

                  Re: Appeal

                  He wouldn’t last two minutes in the Big Brother house. I think as some ironic punishment he should be forced to take part in a new special series rather than be extradited.

        2. nobody who matters

          Re: Appeal

          "....There's no question that the offense is an offense under both US and UK law...."

          Actually, under UK law it would be an offence ;)

      3. PabloBee

        Re: Appeal

        The UK is not an International Court where citizens of any Country can come for some lenient justice. That’s reserved for our own citizens.

    2. ScissorHands

      Re: Appeal

      Civilized counties don't extradite to any countries that have the death penalty. Period,

      1. PabloBee

        Re: Appeal

        Irrelevant argument. That’s not even a consideration.

    3. -tim
      Facepalm

      Re: Appeal

      They could appeal based on the US flat out not telling the truth in a UK court. The US has stated the charges and swore those were the only charges. That leaves out the John Doe warrants against the author of the hacking tool "strobe." I know this because I've seen some of the witness statements and I know there will be additional charges once he is in the US.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Appeal

        Perhaps you'll be a witness for the appeal. As things stand before the UK courts an assurance has been given and, without proof that it will be broken, that must be accepted. If it is broken it will result in a huge row, very likely be the basis for getting such charges thrown out of court in the US and make any further extraditions that much more difficult.

        1. Roland6 Silver badge

          Re: Appeal

          >If it is broken it will result in a huge row

          Between whom?

          It is highly unlikely the UK and US governments will row; the UK is too dependent upon US favours...

      2. Stork Silver badge

        Re: Appeal

        I thought that extraditions normally came with conditions of which changes the extraditing country could bring, with the understanding that breaking the conditions would make it very unlikely that future requests would be agreed

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Appeal

      Has he tried the ASD schtick yet?

  2. Version 1.0 Silver badge
    Facepalm

    My advice for Biden

    If Biden were to pardon Julian Assange when he arrives, and return him home to Australia, then I think the world would start to compare Biden to Carter, essentially a politician with a good attitude. Assange basically only gave everyone access to information about many terrible actions organized by George W. Bush with encouragement from Tony Blair, and now Putin is joining the club.

    Originally I thought Biden was a shitty politician but these days, watching all of today's political actions I'm starting to think he's good. "Good?" who knows, but look at all the other idiots today.

    1. martinusher Silver badge

      Re: My advice for Biden

      Biden is old school, he believes in honor and justice and all that BS. Not fit for purpose in the modern world.

      How many years has Assange been held in solitary now? He must be up there with the Guantanamo leftovers by now.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: My advice for Biden

        Biden is old school, he believes in honor and justice and all that BS. Not fit for purpose in the modern world.

        10% for the big guy? That kind of honor and justice?

      2. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

        Re: My advice for Biden

        Let me check...

        Ah, yes.

        None.

        HMP Belmarsh is not, apparently, a very nice place to be, but Assange is not held in solitary.

        (And for those who bizarrely believe that his time in the Embassy somehow counts, he was not held in solitary confinement there either...)

      3. katrinab Silver badge
        Megaphone

        Re: My advice for Biden

        If Assange had gone to Sweden, been found guilty of rape, and received the maximum sentence, he would have been released from prison about 4 years ago.

        Even if every single allegation made against him was found to be true, I don't think he would have got the maximum sentence.

        1. Lars Silver badge
          Coat

          Re: My advice for Biden

          @katrinab

          He was not afraid of a sentence in Sweden but for being extradited to the US from Sweden, who knows, perhaps he believed that could not happen in Britain.

          I would let him go, write a book, have a life.

          I cannot see him having harmed anybody worth a prison sentence anywhere.

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: My advice for Biden

            UK with an extradition treaty with the US, Sweden not? It looks more likely he was just avoiding the most immediate problem without thinking long term.

            1. Lars Silver badge
              Coat

              Re: My advice for Biden

              @Doctor Syntax

              You find the countries with an extradition treaty with the US here:

              https://2009-2017.state.gov/documents/organization/71600.pdf

              And you find Sweden there since 1963.

              And you could have looked that up yourself.

          2. Richard 12 Silver badge

            Re: My advice for Biden

            It's far, far easier for the US to extradite someone from the UK than from Sweden.

            Not to mention that if he was genuinely afraid of extraordinary rendition, getting on a plane from Sweden to the UK would have made that far, far easier than staying in Sweden. It would have been very easy for a couple of guys in black suits to grab him and bundle him onto "the wrong plane" if that was something the US really wanted to do.

            No, he thought there was a good chance he'd get locked up in Sweden.

            Then he made himself an actual criminal by jumping bail.

            The man is clearly a narcissist who thinks consequences can only happen to other people.

        2. Potemkine! Silver badge

          Re: My advice for Biden

          The development of the story shows it was a plot to extradite him to the US. Sweden dropped the case against Assange as soon as he was in a British jail.

          I don't like the guy, but the facts show there's a conspiracy to send him in an American brig.

      4. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: My advice for Biden

        "How many years has Assange been held in solitary now?"

        He's never been in solitary confinement.

      5. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: My advice for Biden

        Obviously you prefer belligerent, lying TRAITORS like Drumpf. :(

    2. Jellied Eel Silver badge

      Re: My advice for Biden

      If Biden were to pardon Julian Assange when he arrives, and return him home to Australia, then I think the world would start to compare Biden to Carter, essentially a politician with a good attitude.

      Not sure Biden would be able to remember Carter. But you're overlooking a couple of small details. Like leaking the US diplomatic cables. And of course the biggie, Assange's involvement in the great Clinton vs Trump showdown.

      AFAIK, DNC 'hacks' aren't part of the (current) charges, but Assange obviously rather annoyed the US Dems. It'd be interesting if Assange reveals anything about his sources, if the DNC stuff becomes relevant. Assange seems keen to save his own skin, and throw his sources under the bus. Timing could be an issue given the US mid-terms approaching, and the Dems probably don't want too many more of their dirty tricks revealed before then.

      1. ArrZarr Silver badge

        Re: My advice for Biden

        Biden was elected to the US senate in 1973.

        Carter is only 18 years older than him and his entire presidential term was during Biden's Senate career.

        I think it's a pretty safe assumption to make that Biden remembers Carter.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: My advice for Biden

      I think the world would start to compare Biden to Carter

      You mean they'll be saying "Biden who?"

      1. David 132 Silver badge

        Re: My advice for Biden

        "Which one was it that was attacked by a giant swimming rabbit?"

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: My advice for Biden

        Worse. Jimmy was at least famous for being a Peanut Farmer. What has Biden done but politics?

  3. DanceMan

    Did the helicopter pilot who shot the journalist in the early Wikileaks video ever get charged with war crimes? The US has never joined the International Criminal Court. Assange may be an asshoie but this move smells.

    1. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

      If you bothered to watch the video in question, you'll see that (while wrong) the assumption that the thing the journalist was carrying was a RPG was not unreasonable. It was a camera & big lens on a tripod, but the error was understandable (albeit incorrect).

      So no "war crime".

      1. jngreenlee

        Any occupying force is a war crime. Doubly so when dropping hellfire from the sky before being actively shot at. Triple if done in front of the eyes of children.

        There is no reason here, it is all evil.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        It was so clearly an understandable mistake that the US publicly acknowledged it, published the video, and started an independent inquiry into it to fully assess what happened and why.

        What? They didn't? And they're prosecuting the people who published the video, while they never did any investigation into what happened?

        And that's consistent with the US having by now a long history of never investigating their own war crimes? You don't say.

        1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

          What? They didn't? And they're prosecuting the people who published the video, while they never did any investigation into what happened?

          But they did. But this was also one of Assange's problems. Rather than simply reporting the news or just publishing the 'leaked' footage, he decided to editorialise and 'sex it up'.

          So the DoD released unedited footage that added context. 'Collateral Murder' glossed over the armed Iraqis walking with the journalists. Those Iraqis were carrying AKs, an RPG and from memory, an LMG. All things that can give a hovering helicopter a bad day. Pilot loses sight of the group, so manouvers to reacquire the group, only to see someone appear around a corner, kneel, and point something large-ish and round at the helicopter. Pilot, having seen someone with an RPG assumes that's what they're seeing and engages, and the rest becomes history.

          So that initial engagement seems justified, and contradicts the claims in Assange's 'Collateral Murder' movie. What happened next was I think more dubious, ie firing on the rest of the group and engaging the 'rescue' vehicle.

          I thought it was a huge mistake on Assange's part because his video was carefully edited to serve his own agenda. Wikileaks kinda morphed from being stuff the government doesn't want you to see to a propaganda outfit showing what Assange wanted you to see.

          1. Persona non grata

            This entire post is a complete fabrication.

            Not a word of that is true.

            For a full debunking of this and other false claims on this page I'd suggest reading : https://caitlinjohnstone.com/2019/04/20/debunking-all-the-assange-smears/

            1. Jellied Eel Silver badge

              This entire post is a complete fabrication.

              Not a word of that is true.

              Cheers for the link, so...

              D – Remember that the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

              What is fabricated, or untrue? Also..

              A common tactic is to use short phrases, half-thoughts, or word salads which contain few facts and no actual arguments, but contain just enough of a jab to suck you into wasting energy making thorough, well-sourced arguments while they just lean back and continue making weak, low-energy responses to keep you going.

              Or just use references to pre-digested thoughts so you can 'debunk' stuff without having to think for yourself. This is an incredibly common tactitc in the climate 'debate'. Which also makes that somewhat easier. So people will often attempt to 'debunk' climate stuff by regurgitating answers from the 'SkepticalScience' website. That was created by a cartoonist and some friends to provide a handy 'fact-checked' response service. Of course that also means the rebuttals become very familiar, and also easy to debunk. My favorites are probably the '97%' meme, created by SkS themselves and claiming that climate models, especially James Hasens are perfect predictors.

              If you actually do a little 'fact checking' yourself, you'll find both those SkS claims problematic. But such is politics.

            2. Ian Johnston Silver badge

              The web page you referenced says nothing whatsoever about the posting you claim it debunks. Furthermore, Google tells me that its author claims to be " a 100 percent crowdfunded rogue journalist, bogan socialist, anarcho-psychonaut, guerilla poet and utopia prepper", which does not wholly inspire me with confidence.

  4. VoiceOfTruth

    A truly dreadful day

    A stain on so-called British justice.

    1. Malcolm Weir Silver badge

      Re: A truly dreadful day

      Nah.

      That's the whole flaw with Assange's tantrums: he has gone to enormous effort to _avoid_ having his day in court: first in Sweden, then London, and currently the US.

      Justice demands he face trial. And those who feel that he did nothing wrong should do everything they can to ensure he is acquitted (pay lawyers, fund investigators, etc).

      While there are many things I dislike about the US court system, the fact is that the First Amendment gives people in Assange's position more protection than he would have at the Old Bailey.

      1. Tomato42

        Re: A truly dreadful day

        the thing is that Justice will definitely not be served in an US court

      2. CommanderGalaxian

        Re: A truly dreadful day

        "...the fact is that the First Amendment gives people like..."

        iirc, only US citizens are protected thus, not foreign citizens,

        1. Irony Deficient

          iirc, only US citizens are protected thus, not foreign citizens

          You’re recalling incorrectly. The vast majority of US constitutional rights apply to both citizens and non-citizens. The main exceptions are the right to vote in federal elections; eligibility to run for the House of Representatives, the Senate, the vice-presidency, and the presidency; and the “privileges and immunities” clauses of Article IV, Section 2 and the first section of the 14th amendment. Note that most US constitutional rights are limitations on government power rather than special protections for specific groups of people (such as US citizens).

      3. jgard

        Re: A truly dreadful day

        If you think the US govt and legal system haven’t already decided the verdict, you’re deluded. And if you think the First Amendment applies to an Australian citizen committing crimes outside the US you’re mistaken.

        For the record, I’m glad he is going. He has evaded the rape charges by skipping bail, hiding in an embassy, disappearing, running away again and more. He’s acted like an entitled, whiny and ungrateful little prick toward people who have helped him, and he obviously sees the law as applying only to others.

        I have no idea whether he raped anyone in Sweden. But rape is a disgusting and violent crime. Do his alleged victims not deserve justice? Should he not be tried like any normal suspect? Apparently he thinks not. Assange has gone to extraordinary lengths to evade justice, leveraging every opportunity his fame and circumstances afford him. He’s also shamelessness abused the kindness of others in that same quest.

        How can he have the chutzpah to berate governments for not investigating and trying alleged criminals when he reuses to face the music himself? He’s a grifter and a coward and I’ll be glad when he’s gone. I would rather my taxes be spent on a more worthy cause.

        1. Ian 55

          Re: A truly dreadful day

          On the plus side, his lawyers' attempt to argue that removal of a condom without asking isn't rape did lead to the Supreme Court saying 'yes, it fucking is' (slight precis) so he has done some good.

  5. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
    IT Angle

    While ya'll

    whizzing on about how bad it is to extradite him.

    lets see major events

    Accused of rape in Sweden, skips out of the country to the UK

    Arrested under a euro arrest warrent, told he'll be extradited to Sweden to answer charges

    Released on 1 million bail and has to live at a set address.

    Appeals fail.. extradition order signed sending him to Sweden.

    Skips bail losing 1 million quid in the process , hides in the embassy for 7 years

    Pisses off ambassador, get kicked out of embassy and arrested for skipping bail

    1 years prison time for skipping bail

    Asks for bail while he fights extradition to the US.

    Judge laughs.

    Current status: in prison after being told he'll be extradited to the US

    Still has appeals and legal avenues to go down to avoid this.

    If he'd answered charges in Sweden, he'd more than likely been told no charges to answer and released... even if convicted of rape, he'd have got 5 yrs,released after 2 yr and deported to Auz

    The last 10 years of his life have been of his own making......

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: While ya'll

      Let's see what we have here...

      > Accused of rape in Sweden, skips out of the country to the UK

      I believe he left the country before any charges were levelled at him. With a busy speaking schedule, it's hardly unusual to be off to the next location the next day. You do know that the two women who accused him are Social Democrat party acolytes? And that the lawyer who represented them is also a Social Democrat and they all are members of the same church?

      > Skips bail losing 1 million quid in the process ...

      Actually, he caused the people who helped post bail for him to suddenly owe the state lots of money. Many bridges were probably burned.

      > ...hides in the embassy for 7 years

      He was sure the Swedish Government would look in the other direction while the CIA collected him from pre-trial detention and "rendered" him to US justice.

      The Swedes have form for this having allowed the rendition of two Swedish citizens not long after 9/11. They were taken to a black site and tortured. Even though the government eventually admitted it had happened, the foreign minister who authorised it had conveniently been murdered. Anyway, you can't prosecute a Swedish politician - they have immunity from prosecution regarding anything they do in their political capacity.

      I'd say he was more than entitled to suspect he'd be on Air CIA sharpish if he let the Swedes get their hands on him.

      > If he'd answered charges in Sweden, he'd more than likely been told no charges to answer and released...

      > even if convicted of rape, he'd have got 5 yrs,released after 2 yr and deported to Auz

      See above.

      > The last 10 years of his life have been of his own making......

      Possibly, but what Assange's plight is really about is the fact that he aired the USA's dirty war laundry to the public and thought that the glare of publicity would protect him from retribution. That's a naive mistake and one which means that he will probably spend the rest of his life in prison. In his view, he was doing a good and noble thing in showing the world how much the USA was lying about what went on during the invasion of Iraq. There are many who share that opinion.

      I've never met him, but I get the distinct impression that I wouldn't like him much if I did due to his rather large ego. An ego which caused him to seriously underestimate who his actions would upset and how far they would go to make sure he would pay for shaming the USA.

      Objectively though, I can ignore the man and defend his actions. He should immediately be released and given asylum in the UK or given safe passage to the destination of his choosing along with his wife and children.

      He certainly won't get any justice in the USA.

      1. samoanbiscuit

        Re: While ya'll

        This narrative fell apart in 2016 when he held back leaked data from the Republican National Committee while gleefully leaking the DNC emails and whatever he thought would get Donal Trump into the White House.

        That's when it became obvious that he had an agenda, and it wasn't truth or justice.

      2. Falmari Silver badge

        Re: While ya'll

        @grizewald “I believe he left the country before any charges were levelled at him.”

        The Swedish police had not charged him with any offense when he left. But he had been accused of rape before he left Sweden.

        That said he certainly didn’t skip Sweden because he had been accused of rape. Leaving more than a month after the allegations became public is not skipping. 20/8/2010 arrest warrant issued for rape and molestation*, 27/9/2010 Assange leaves Sweden.

        *Warrant withdrawn a day later by Stockholm's chief prosecutor, Eva Finne saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape,". Only for the investigation to be reopened 1/9/2010 by Sweden's Director of Prosecution Marianne Ny, but no warrant was issued.

    2. Yes Me Silver badge

      Re: While ya'll

      All true, but it doesn't change the fact that the US is trying to prosecute someone for doing the job of a journalist. At least they haven't simply assassinated him, which is the procedure adopted by Israel and Saudi Arabia, among others.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: While ya'll

        the US is trying to prosecute someone for doing the job of a journalist.

        Calling Assange a journalist is an insult to journalists. His primary aim is to make himself look important, anything else is just collateral damage.

    3. katrinab Silver badge

      Re: While ya'll

      The maximum sentence for rape in Sweden is 10 years as far as I can see. But I don't think he would have got the maximum sentence, so yes, 5 years sounds about right.

    4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: While ya'll

      "Skips bail losing 1 million quid in the process"

      Not his million, of course. That must have disappointed some of his better off supporters. (Wasn't it more like £240,000, however?)

    5. Zolko Silver badge

      Re: While ya'll

      @Boris the Cockroach : good choice of pseudo

      lets see major events

      yes, lets

      1 years prison time for skipping bail

      he's been imprisoned since april 2019, that's 3 years : you're a liar. And now if you pretend that the 2 additional years are because of the extradition, then you acknowledge that he was right from day 1 : you're illogical.

      1. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge

        Re: While ya'll

        I think you missed a bit with your edits(bit like St Julian)

        1 year in jail for skipping bail

        Extradition order when that sentence is completed.

        Applies for bail while appealing said extradition order.

        Bail refused because of of him being percieved as a flight risk and having previously skipped out on bail

        Thats why he's been remanded to jail

        As I've often posted about St Julian... the guy is a dick and most of whats happened to him is because he's a dick (and alledged use of that dick in Sweden)

        Oh and my nick has all to do with my job status rather than anything St Julian related. so there :p

      2. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

        Re: While ya'll

        2 additional years on remand because, for obvious reasons, he has been refused bail. Even the US takes "time served" in account if subsequently sentenced to jail. If the US sticks to the guarantees it's given the UK government, then at most he's going to get about 5 years, to be served in Australia, will get the two years on remand taken into account and then, depending the Aussie justice system and any agreements they may make (or have made) with the US, his time in jail may be as much as halved and released "on licence". He could, conceivably, spend as little as one year in an Australian jail. Then again, he will spend time in US jail on remand awaiting his court date and during the trial. If that takes a long time, it's even possible that by the time he reaches Australia, there may be little to no time in jail.

    6. Ididntbringacoat

      Re: While ya'll

      Ah, finally I get why some call Australia "Oz". Well, I am past 70 now so, . . . wait, what was this about?

  6. Claverhouse Silver badge
    Unhappy

    That's Pretty Much What I Figured

    Chronicle of a Death Foretold.

  7. Winkypop Silver badge
    Devil

    In other related NEWS

    One of the levels of Hell has been renamed in honour of the British Home Secretary Priti Patel.

    This follows her outstanding work with Julian Assange and the Rawandan flight!

    Going down…..

    1. Franco

      Re: In other related NEWS

      She should have been out of a job over the bullying investigation, that's why the Prime Ministers FIRST ethics advisor quit, never mind the one that did this week.

    2. anonymous boring coward Silver badge

      Re: In other related NEWS

      Patel is a nasty piece of work, perfectly representing the Nasty Party.

  8. Trigun

    I am not at all surprised: As soon as Assange lost his appeal at the high court, this was almost guaranteed.

  9. Sin2x

    This is murder. Plain and simple.

  10. WolfFan

    If I were Joe Biden

    I’d just park Saint Julian in a nice Club Fed type Federal facility and let moss grow over him. When his lawyers file a Speedy Trial motion, point out that there are complications due to the long drawn out extradition process, mostly due to him, and that the trial will be held as soon as possible. When he’s spent roughly the same time inside as Bradley/Chelsea Manning, drop all charges for humanitarian reasons and deport him to Oz. No muss, no fuss, no expensive trial. And being parked in a Club Fed isn’t exactly hard time.

    Now, if he were silly enough to escape from, or even attempt to escape from, the Club Fed, then drop the hammer on him, hard. And that would be a new offense, not linked to whatever he was extradited for, so any promises made at the time of extradition would no longer be binding. Hell, I wouldn’t put it past the Feds if they left a door open and unguarded just to see what he did…

  11. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "a hard-hitting investigative journalist"

    I disagree. Assange is not and never has been a journalist of any kind, let alone an investigative one.

    He is an asshole, but that's beside the point.

    All he did was recieve information and publish it. The US Government didn't like that, but that's not necessarily a reason to slam a foreign national into a US jail.

    After all, the US jealously guards all its nationals that did hideous things in other countries, so what goes around should come around.

    1. Franco

      Re: "a hard-hitting investigative journalist"

      It's Assange's ego that's got him in to this. If he'd just anonymously published everything leaked to him he'd have been fine, but he's made himself the public face of Wikileaks, only leaked selectively and chosen to editorialise on what he's leaked.

      Made himself the story, which is the first thing journalists (if he were one, which he is not) are taught not to do.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Distraction from more vile behaviour? Rawanda anyone?

    Complete distraction from more vile actions

  13. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Enough with the appeals and whinging. Throw him on a plane and get it over with. This has dragged on enough decades.

  14. Lordrobot

    Pam Anderson called Trump a Toxic Coward... uh oh

    Once again, the zealous will fail the "heavy burden of showing justification for the enforcement of such a [prior] restraint."

    New York Times Co. v. United States, 403 U.S. 713

    A mere promise to publish is not a conspiracy to engage in espionage. Think of Trump as a far stupider version of Nixon. To feed his unschooled populist supporters, Trump focused on personalities Not facts or the law of course. Pamala Anderson called Trump a "Toxic Coward."

    Now Biden the ponderously dense disengaged Trump second Term looks to the Easter Bunny for answers.

    In the USA, Assange will get the best First Amendment Attorney. The Government will rely on recent law graduates trying to make a name for themselves at the DOJ. The DOJ will lose the case in flying colours, just as they lost cases like the Ted Stephens case. No jurist is going to extend the gov reach into the First Amendment.

    Assange should accept extradition and give Joe Biden the headache of a lifetime just in front of the Midterm elections as the US Economy tumbles into the ashpit of Trump Biden Smoot Hawley Tariffs, double-digit inflation, and rising interest rates, Trump's attack on the capital which is espionage, while Joe tries to hide with his new cat at the beach. A man and his cat...

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Pam Anderson called Trump a Toxic Coward... uh oh

      The wishful thinking by Assange supporters really makes me realize that a shortage of mental health professionals really is a global issue... :P

  15. Alex Stuart

    Trade

    I take it we're getting Anne Sacoolas in return, because if we're going to do the extradition thing, that would be fair, right?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like