131–140 of 159 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I supported him until he started releasing information in drips and drabs to interfere with a US election, and willingly accepted stolen documents from an obvious foreign agent.
so, until the truths were convenient? And btw, the question is not if we support his decision to leak things, but whether he deserves to die in jail (or worse) or not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
> Assange was covertly acting as an agent of a hostile foreign government with the intention of interfering in U.S. domestic politics. You're gonna need proof for that, staunch.
The rest of us can, with some basic level of objectivity, just look at the preponderance of the evidence and come to a conclusion. I believe that any reasonable person that looks into the publicly available evidence would come to the same conclusion.
On the other hand, if you're one of the rubes that bought the Seth Rich story from Assange you can be 100% sure that you're terrible at objective analysis.
"First of all I am very pleased the police were able to apprehend him and now he is rightly behind bars because he broke UK law," Javid told BBC Radio 4 on Thursday. I'll guess that this is a true statement, but which law, and does it support extradition? Oh, it must be 'skipping bail', on what seem to be exaggerated charges. So a kind of 'you broke the law because you didn't admit to the charges' kind of thing. Hmmm…
wikipedia is your friend: “Assange breached bail conditions by staying in the embassy and faced arrest if he left. Assange's supporters, including journalist Jemima Goldsmith, journalist John Pilger, and film-maker Ken Loach, forfeited £293,500 in bail and sureties.[203][204] Goldsmith said she was surprised at his asylum bid and expected him to face the Swedish allegations.” the guy ran from the law and the law caug…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The indictment is in the Eastern District of Virginia. This court is a favourite of the DoJ, since IIRC it has never (or maybe only very rarely, I can't remember where I read this) ruled in favour of the defendant in an Espionage Act case. The idea Assange will have a fair trial is a joke -- though I do hope he does.
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…
The reason for that bias might be more complicated (the view of the local community which will be selected for a jury might be influenced through various means -- but that's a secondary question to the primary point that there is a statistical bias regardless of the reason for it).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When someone technically violated the law, but the jury doesn't convict is.
when somebody technically violated the law, but there's reasonable doubt, it's not nullification
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.
* Juries cannot be punished or reprimanded for coming to the "wrong decision". * A defendant who is acquitted cannot be tried again in front of a jury because of the defense of double jeopardy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When someone technically violated the law, but the jury doesn't convict is.
when somebody technically violated the law, but there's reasonable doubt, it's not nullification
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What war crimes did Assange expose?
this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see how this is complicated. US has a lot of allies and those allies have agreed to this. Turkey does not have a lot of allies (or at least as strong of allies as the US has/had) and thus doesn't have the same agreements in place.
You can't see how it's complicated? Not at all? No historical events pop out as "it's not normal precedence to arrest people in other countries for crimes in your country"? I mean look at the international outrage when people from country A commit a crime INSIDE country B and country B punishes based on their own laws. The north Korea prisoner who was tortured and died shortly after release stands out, but there are…
I'm hoping that he is extradited and stands trial because I can't think of an alternative. It will settle the issue as best as we humans can.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
this... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5rXPrfnU3G0
The only reason those targets were engaged is because they were thought to be combatants. Do you think the gunner/pilot are happy about it? It's collateral damage in a warzone and horrible but it's not murder or a warcrime.
Maybe you haven't seen the whole video -- they were laughing about it during and afterwards, and then blamed the people they just killed for "bringing their kids to a battle" (ignoring the that US was invading the country, so really the US had brought the "battle" to them).
In addition, the reporter's deaths were covered up by the government instead of being honest to Reuters and the reporter's families -- saying they were collateral deaths. In addition, the war logs showed evidence of civilian death and friendly-fire figures being intentionally manipulated by the US government (as well as many other things such as blatant examples of corruption).