Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 159 posts

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#71

Post by bduerst »

Mugwort wrote: post #65
Chestofdraw wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I believe the findings of the Mueller report, that Trump did not collude with the Russians to sway the election. I'm rather relieved about it. The possibility of Russia hacking our elections was a very serious matter and I'm glad the case is closed. Still, I'm very very distressed about Trump being President. At least the Russians aren't involved. Now, regarding war crimes and killing journalists, Soviet Russia had a…

The Mueller investigation did not find evidence of collusion, but that is not the same as evidence of no collusion. There was plenty of evidence that Wikileaks and the Russian State were influencing the election in favor of Trump: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-blames-putin...

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#72

Post by decoyworker »

Mugwort wrote: post #45

It's worth keeping in mind that when they say Assange is guilty of violating the espionage act, did illegal hacking etc. what they really means is that he's guilt of publishing video showing US armed forces murdering unarmed journalists and civilians. If people are going to place emphasis on Assange's crimes and make them a high priority then it's hypocrisy of the worst possible kind to ignore the serious war crimes…

What war crimes did Assange expose?

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#73

Post by cycrutchfield »

staunch wrote: post #23
influx wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about Edward Snowden being housed, clothed and fed by the same Russian government that was interfering with US elections and providing information to Wikileaks?

AFAIK he's earned his own money by doing talks and receiving donations from supporters, etc not from the Russian government. And Snowden has never mislead anyone about why he's in Russia. He's said that he would love to come home. And if U.S. whistleblower protections was stronger he could. Snowden was openly revealing violations of the U.S. constitution. Assange was covertly acting as an agent of a hostile foreign g…

Snowden’s existence is currently at the pleasure of the Russian government. If he did anything to displease them, we would quickly hear that he has committed suicide by shooting himself twice in the back of the head.

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#74

Post by benguillet »

Mugwort wrote: post #65
Chestofdraw wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I believe the findings of the Mueller report, that Trump did not collude with the Russians to sway the election. I'm rather relieved about it. The possibility of Russia hacking our elections was a very serious matter and I'm glad the case is closed. Still, I'm very very distressed about Trump being President. At least the Russians aren't involved. Now, regarding war crimes and killing journalists, Soviet Russia had a…

Trump not colliding with the Russians doesn't mean the Russians were not involved in the election. It just means he did not work with them. They could (and probably did) worked on their own because it's their own best interest to see Trump elected.

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#75

Post by empath75 »

292355744930110 wrote: post #69
empath75 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be absolutely stunned if that was the case. I bet he gets less than a year. He probably won’t even be convicted unless they come up with something better than their current indictment.

Why would the US go to all this trouble just to put him in jail for less than a year?

The point is disrupting wikileaks, not putting him in jail.

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#76

Post by decoyworker »

zeveb wrote: post #67
Mugwort wrote: post #45

It's worth keeping in mind that when they say Assange is guilty of violating the espionage act, did illegal hacking etc. what they really means is that he's guilt of publishing video showing US armed forces murdering unarmed journalists and civilians. If people are going to place emphasis on Assange's crimes and make them a high priority then it's hypocrisy of the worst possible kind to ignore the serious war crimes…

> he's guilt of publishing video showing US armed forces murdering unarmed journalists and civilians. I am not aware that Mr. Assange ever published anything 'showing US armed forces murdering unarmed journalists and civilians,' although I have read allegations in the press that he published video of people being killed collareally to lawful military action. Collateral damage is not murder. Yes, innocents get killed…

This right here.

Murder is the unlawful killing of another human. Unintended civilian casualties or collateral damage in war are a tragedy but they are not murder and are almost never a war crime.

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#77

Post by empath75 »

tracker1 wrote: post #42
joshuamorton wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a bit of a weird statement. Criminal courts don't "rule". Judges make rulings (which, if my understanding is correct, are binding and set precedent). Assange will be put in front of a jury. The jury will make a determination of guilt or lack thereof. But such a finding isn't a ruling in the legal sense. It's not precedent setting. It's that a prosecutor managed to convince a group of 12 randomish people that…

Judges can and often do, set expectations on scope and consideration the jury should take into consideration. That doesn't mean that jury nullification cannot happen, however no judge will generally let any jury know that they're even allowed to do that.

acquittal is not nullification.

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#78

Post by simion314 »

Chestofdraw wrote: post #52
Mugwort wrote: post #45

It's worth keeping in mind that when they say Assange is guilty of violating the espionage act, did illegal hacking etc. what they really means is that he's guilt of publishing video showing US armed forces murdering unarmed journalists and civilians. If people are going to place emphasis on Assange's crimes and make them a high priority then it's hypocrisy of the worst possible kind to ignore the serious war crimes…

[flagged]

>It's also worth remembering that he disseminated information on the behalf of the Russian state in an effort to get Trump elected.

And how can you define this as espionage ? Publishing thins you don't like or even publishing false accusations is not espionage.

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#79

Post by [deleted] »

292355744930110 wrote: post #69
empath75 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would be absolutely stunned if that was the case. I bet he gets less than a year. He probably won’t even be convicted unless they come up with something better than their current indictment.

Why would the US go to all this trouble just to put him in jail for less than a year?

[deleted]

Re: Julian Assange: Home Secretary Signs US Extradition Request

#80

Post by tracker1 »

empath75 wrote: post #77
tracker1 wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Judges can and often do, set expectations on scope and consideration the jury should take into consideration. That doesn't mean that jury nullification cannot happen, however no judge will generally let any jury know that they're even allowed to do that.

acquittal is not nullification.

When someone technically violated the law, but the jury doesn't convict is.
Post reply on HN