‘UK, you are America’s bitch’: Pamela Anderson launches scathing tweetstorm following Assange arrest
...

...

I am in shock..
I couldn’t hear clearly what he said?
He looks very bad.
How could you Equador ?
(Because he exposed you).
How could you UK. ?
Of course - you are America’s bitch and
you need a diversion from your idiotic Brexit bullshit

And the USA ?
This toxic coward of a President
He needs to rally his base? -
You are selfish and cruel.
You have taken the entire world backwards.

You are devils and liars and thieves.
And you will ROTT

And
WE WILL RISE

...

The US charge against Assange is conspiracy, with Chelsea Manning, to commit computer intrusion, in particular by breaking a US government computer password. The maximum sentence is 5 years imprisonment. https://www.justice.gov/usao-edva/pr/wi ... conspiracy …

Under the 2003 US - UK Extradition Treaty, Assange can only be tried in the US for the offence for which he is extradited.

I'm With Stupid wrote:

mrjonno wrote:We extradite to the US on the condition of no death penalty, even Trump would honour that (or the adults in the room would)

Well yeah, but the issue with extraditing to the States isn't necessarily the death penalty, but the ridiculously harsh punishments they have for absolutely everything in comparison with the rest of the developed world. There was that one a while back with Gary McKinnon where they tried to extradite a man with aspergers to face up to 70 years in prison for the horrific crime of hacking into US government computers to look for evidence of conspiracy theories. That's just so far beyond the sort of sentence that any civilized country would impose on anyone for a crime with no clear victim. Blocking that extradition was the one good thing that Theresa May did in her time as Home Secretary, and the fact that the US government declined to bring him to a UK court shows you exactly how little they actually cared about criminal justice, and exactly how much this was about sending a message to people not to mess with the US government. The pathetic thing about that case, and the US-UK extradition agreement generally, is that they don't actually have to provide any evidence to be contested in a UK court before the extradition is granted, which makes it ripe for political abuse. Not that I'm suggesting that them going after Julian Assange is at all politically motivated, of course.

‘5 years for ATTEMPT to crack a password?’ Journalists, whistleblowers slam US Assange charge

Journalists and whistleblowers have weighed in on the indictment brought by the US against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, calling the current password-cracking charge “weak,” but setting a dangerous precedent for press freedom.
...

...

Edward Snowden:

The weakness of the US charge against Assange is shocking. The allegation he tried (and failed?) to help crack a password during their world-famous reporting has been public for nearly a decade: it is the count Obama's DOJ refused to charge, saying it endangered journalism.

Glenn Greenwald:

The DOJ says part of what Assange did to justify his prosecution - beyond allegedly helping Manning get the documents - is he encouraged Manning to get more docs for him to publish. Journalists do this with sources constantly: it's the criminalization of journalism

Aaron Maté:

The charge against Assange is that he "agreed to assist Manning in cracking a password stored on U.S. Dept. of Defense computers." It looks like their alleged "password-cracking agreement" wasn't even successful. Assange faces 5 years in prison over it.

Journalist Glenn Greenwald also commented on the Obama-era decision, saying that Democrats who have spent two years “feigning concerns over press freedom” in relation to the Trump administration’s attacks on journalists, but who now support the Donald Trump DOJ’s indictment of Assange were “beneath contempt.”

Internet freedom activist Kim Dotcom also weighed in on the potential five-year prison sentence for trying to crack a password. “Is it still April Fool’s Day?” he tweeted, with the hashtag #FreeJulian.

In a further tweet, Dotcom said that the sentence was possibly a “tactic” to tempt Assange to consider swift extradition, but that more and heavier charges likely awaited. “DOJ may have a superseding indictment with more charges ready on arrival. I can tell you from experience DOJ is full of liars and tricksters,” he wrote.

Editor of the White House Watch website Dan Froomkin tweeted advice to journalists at mainstream news organizations, saying they should acknowledge that the indictment was a “ridiculous stretch” and was in relation to “the noblest of his leaks,” making it a “chilling” moment for journalism.
...

Hermit wrote:So the government he helped to get elected by providing stolen information will now prosecute him for leaking stolen information. The irony is delicious.

US President Donald Trump, who said he loved WikiLeaks during his election campaign, tried to distance himself from the arrest of Julian Assange, which was carried out by Britain on the request of the US.
Speaking to journalists in the Oval Office on Thursday, hours after the arrest of Assange in London, Trump said:

"I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing."

Trump was far less reluctant to speak about the transparency site in 2016, when it played a major role in the US presidential election after it published a number of documents leaked from the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Then-candidate Trump called the work of the site “amazing” and said he “loved” what it was doing.
...

Hermit wrote:So the government he helped to get elected by providing stolen information will now prosecute him for leaking stolen information. The irony is delicious.

Hermit wrote:So the government he helped to get elected by providing stolen information will now prosecute him for leaking stolen information. The irony is delicious.

mrjonno wrote:We extradite to the US on the condition of no death penalty, even Trump would honour that (or the adults in the room would)

Mike_L wrote:

Hermit wrote:So the government he helped to get elected by providing stolen information will now prosecute him for leaking stolen information. The irony is delicious.

‘I know nothing about Wikileaks. It’s not my thing,’ says Trump following Assange’s arrest

US President Donald Trump, who said he loved WikiLeaks during his election campaign, tried to distance himself from the arrest of Julian Assange, which was carried out by Britain on the request of the US.
Speaking to journalists in the Oval Office on Thursday, hours after the arrest of Assange in London, Trump said:

"I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing."

Trump was far less reluctant to speak about the transparency site in 2016, when it played a major role in the US presidential election after it published a number of documents leaked from the Hillary Clinton campaign.

Then-candidate Trump called the work of the site “amazing” and said he “loved” what it was doing.
...

fisherman wrote:The complainant in Sweden has asked that the case be reopened. Swedish prosecuters have until Aug 2020 to resume the case and seek extradition. Good summary at twitter feed below.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1116597761128845312

To show balance I will concede this to Assange supporters. There can be no good reason if (as it appears) Sweden (and complainant's lawyer) were not informed in advance of pending arrest. All the more credit for the lawyer and the prosecuting body to react the same day.

Thommo wrote:

fisherman wrote:The complainant in Sweden has asked that the case be reopened. Swedish prosecuters have until Aug 2020 to resume the case and seek extradition. Good summary at twitter feed below.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1116597761128845312

Yes, that does seem a good summary, and it agrees with what I've read in other places.

One thing I didn't quite follow though:

To show balance I will concede this to Assange supporters. There can be no good reason if (as it appears) Sweden (and complainant's lawyer) were not informed in advance of pending arrest. All the more credit for the lawyer and the prosecuting body to react the same day.

"No good reason" refers to what here?

I can't quite see how arresting Assange for bail violations required pre-notification of Swedish authorities.

Thommo wrote:

fisherman wrote:The complainant in Sweden has asked that the case be reopened. Swedish prosecuters have until Aug 2020 to resume the case and seek extradition. Good summary at twitter feed below.

https://twitter.com/davidallengreen/status/1116597761128845312

Yes, that does seem a good summary, and it agrees with what I've read in other places.

One thing I didn't quite follow though:

To show balance I will concede this to Assange supporters. There can be no good reason if (as it appears) Sweden (and complainant's lawyer) were not informed in advance of pending arrest. All the more credit for the lawyer and the prosecuting body to react the same day.

"No good reason" refers to what here?

I can't quite see how arresting Assange for bail violations required pre-notification of Swedish authorities.

More than six years after Julian Assange moved himself into the confines of the Ecuadorian embassy building in London, the WikiLeaks founder finds himself in danger again.