Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Ecuador would like Julian Assange out of their embassy by the sounds of it.

Only in Loonworld. Unfortunately these will be some of the closest publicly monitored judicial proceedings of the century.

I disagree. The extradition hearings might well be open but, once he's in the states, they'll say "National security", close the doors, and that's that. Way too many powerful people are going to be named in the trial and that's info those people won't want public.
 
I disagree. There's far too much noise around him for him to just disappear into a supermax. I think there'd be a very public trial. We shall see.

maybe, but will Trump and his pals allow it when there's so much naughty news that could come out?
 
I wonder if and when we will see the contents of the insurance files released.
If there is any info of worth in them they will likely hold them for a while as leverage.

Although such a perfect job of turning opinion against him has been done I doubt the press would even bother reporting it now.
 
Corbyn and Abbott's thoughts on this are given prominence on the BBC.

Not sure that will help them win over any wavering voters...
 
This is the same shit as the theories that Max Clifford would somehow 'dish the dirt' on people at some stage after the justice system got him.

Not really - Trump and a lot of powerful politicians weren't directly part of that game. This is different as there are already accusations team Trump had something to do with it.
 
Corbyn and Abbott's thoughts on this are given prominence on thBBC.

Not sure that will help them win over any wavering voters...

Good to see them not pandering to 'wavering voters' and taking the correct position on this. Though I'm not sure what the 'don't extradite on human rights grounds' means in detail. Not that this will make any difference, the Tories can't wait to get to play lacky on this. Gary McKinnon got a blie due primarily to his age.
 
Good to see them not pandering to 'wavering voters' and taking the correct position on this. Though I'm not sure what the 'don't extradite on human rights grounds' means in detail. Not that this will make any difference, the Tories can't wait to get to play lacky on this. Gary McKinnon got a blie due primarily to his age.
If you don't know what if means, how can you declare it the correct position?
You really do post a lot of glib liberal nonsense...
 
Good to see them not pandering to 'wavering voters' and taking the correct position on this. Though I'm not sure what the 'don't extradite on human rights grounds' means in detail. Not that this will make any difference, the Tories can't wait to get to play lacky on this. Gary McKinnon got a blie due primarily to his age.

What's his age got to do with? McKinnon is older than Assange.
 
Good to see them not pandering to 'wavering voters' and taking the correct position on this. Though I'm not sure what the 'don't extradite on human rights grounds' means in detail. Not that this will make any difference, the Tories can't wait to get to play lacky on this. Gary McKinnon got a blie due primarily to his age.
Who do you imagine gets to decide? Have you been following any recent big extradition cases at all?
 
Not really - Trump and a lot of powerful politicians weren't directly part of that game. This is different as there are already accusations team Trump had something to do with it.

What would Assange have on anyone that he's been sat on for the past 7 years whilst hiding in a broom-cupboard to avoid facing the charges of rape levelled against him?

If he really had this dynamite that you seem to think he has, why would the US be keen to get him over there for a trial, rather than just send him to look at the magnificent spire on Salisbury cathedral?


The extradition hearings might well be open but, once he's in the states, they'll say "National security", close the doors, and that's that.

So they'd be happy with him saying whatever he likes at one stage of the proceedings, yet would hold another stage in camera in case he says something embarrassing? That doesn't even begin to make sense.
 
If you don't know what if means, how can you declare it the correct position?
You really do post a lot of glib liberal nonsense...
The position not to extradite is correct
Wether its on "human rights grounds'" or not doesn't interest me. I don't know what human rights case they have in mind. I don't think they should extradite on political grounds, not human rights grounds'.
 
It seems the yanks want to charge him with conspiring with Manning to nick information. If he actually plotted with Manning for Manning to steal the info, then Manning went away and stole it, then he should be prosecuted. That’s different from Manning contacting Assange and saying “look what I’ve got” and Assange publishing it.
 
It seems the yanks want to charge him with conspiring with Manning to nick information. If he actually plotted with Manning for Manning to steal the info, then Manning went away and stole it, then he should be prosecuted. That’s different from Manning contacting Assange and saying “look what I’ve got” and Assange publishing it.
There is a range of things they can/may get him on - they have to be careful due to lack of specialty/mirroring with espionage, they effectively have to make it criminal. Which opens up Rusbridger and others to the same, which the Obama admin decided against. Stuff like exporting stolen goods.
 
What would Assange have on anyone

I'll educate you if you're as blank as you seem but I will try to jog your memory.

Trump - TV appeal to Russia- Clinton emails - US election - Paul & Julian - Russia

Do I really need to go further, or can you cure your apparent ignorance with Google?
 
There is a range of things they can/may get him on - they have to be careful due to lack of specialty/mirroring with espionage, they effectively have to make it criminal. Which opens up Rusbridger and others to the same, which the Obama admin decided against. Stuff like exporting stolen goods.
So they haven’t yet laid out the exact charges they want to press?
 
I'll educate you if you're as blank as you seem but I will try to jog your memory.

Trump - TV appeal to Russia- Clinton emails - US election - Paul & Julian - Russia

Do I really need to go further, or can you cure your apparent ignorance with Google?
You don't recall him setting the AG and other top types at him - publicly making him extradition of him a 'priority'. Ooh the man with all the secrets.
 
I'll educate you if you're as blank as you seem but I will try to jog your memory.

Trump - TV appeal to Russia- Clinton emails - US election - Paul & Julian - Russia

Do I really need to go further, or can you cure your apparent ignorance with Google?
Your selective quoting there is a bit shit. Bahnhoff’s point is why would Assange or his supporters not already have used any information that they possess?
 
Your selective quoting there is a bit shit. Bahnhoff’s point is why would Assange or his supporters not already have used any information that they possess?

It's one thing to say it, another to name names in open court. To convict him of anything to do with the Clinton emails means witnesses be brought in, and they could well include senior members of the Trump administration. We already know at least one of that bunch of bastards contacted Assange, that potentially leading to a lot of trouble for people that don't want things out, or even to be reminded of things in public.
Of course your argument assumes Assange knows nothing new, but you have to be way wrong if you think he won't pull every trick he can if he's dumped in a court. Put yourself in team Trump's position - What would you do?
 
Back
Top Bottom