101–110 of 1001 posts
Sweden may differ of course. I don't think either of the 3 primaries care what Sweden thinks.
How do plea deals work for precedent? As despite the constant claim that he was only being charged for assisting in hacking US computers, the plea deal is over violations of the Espionage Act specifically about receiving and publishing classified documents. Or basically his acts as a journalist. Can this be used to indict other journalists who receive and publish classified information? As if so, this feels like a hu…
They don't. Generally: lower court decisions don't create binding precedent. Further: Assange wasn't simply charged with "receiving and publishing classified information"; he was charged with being instrumental in that information being exfiltrated in the first place.
Practically, yes.
I've been in situations where there was no precedent, and in asking what would happen if this went to court, decisions were made based on how lower courts ruled. Legal analyses, law review articles, customary practice, etc. all /influence/ courts.
Politically shrewd for each of the 3 primary governments involved, removes the issue from the agenda. I'd say its zero-sum outcome for any player: as many people will be angry as happy he's freed. the point being it can't be weaponised as easily as having him in the cell. Sweden may differ of course. I don't think either of the 3 primaries care what Sweden thinks.
He was already effectively a political prisoner. The US made enough of an example of him I guess. Expose US war crimes and this will happen to you.
Both Snowden and Assange went far beyond "blowing the whistle" in what they leaked and/or solicited.
Why is this case located with the United States District Court For The Northern Mariana Islands?
https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nmid.64...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It is the same conventional wisdom that held that the Swedish state prosecutor would never break Swedish laws in order to keep a prosecution indefinitely ongoing. Naturally the US had no plan to charge Assange the same day that the Swedish state prosecutor had to drop. Then a higher court actually found the state prosecutor breaking Swedish law, because as a state prosecutor is not legally allowed in Sweden to keep a…
Surely you don't need any conspiracy for the US to charge him at the same time as the Swedish prosecutor drops charges? That can be done unilaterally by the US prosecutor.
What does that say about those people? Are they easily led by emotion? They certainly don't care about the rule of law, if breaking the law by others can so easily be ignored. They aren't particularly patriotic, if they think that subverting the checks and balances in their preferred kind of government is fine.
I'm glad this partiular episode will be finished soon.