# Julian Assange (remember him?) update **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 5, 2016, 7:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210 "2016-02-05T07:20:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 15
**Author:** ![Sunny\_Daze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunny_daze/32/438_2.png) [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/281 "2018-11-16T20:20:57Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Russian intelligence would certainly try to coopt Assange. SOP. [Edward Snowden](https://twitter.com/Snowden/status/1063520583789539328) comments: [INDENT] You can despise Wikileaks and everything it stands for. You can think Assange is an evil spirit reanimated by Putin himself. But you cannot support the prosecution of a publisher for publishing without narrowing the basic rights every newspaper relies on. [/INDENT] Snowden links to article by the [Freedom of the Press Foundation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_the_Press_Foundation), an organization founded 5 years ago; he and Daniel Ellsberg serve on the board: Trevor Timm, executive director of Freedom of the Press Foundation, has issued the following statement: > > “Any charges brought against WikiLeaks for their publishing activities pose a profound and incredibly dangerous threat to press freedom. Whether you like Assange or hate him, the theories used in a potential Espionage Act prosecution would threaten countless reporters at the New York Times, Washington Post, and the many other news outlets that report on government secrets all the time. While everyone will have to wait and see what the charges detail, it’s quite possible core First Amendment principles will be at stake in this case.” > > [Prosecuting WikiLeaks for publishing activities poses a profound threat to press freedom](https://freedom.press/news/prosecuting-wikileaks-publishing-activities-poses-profound-threat-press-freedom/) Of course I can question the information supplied by any publisher. I should do so, in fact. I don’t see it as an assault of the Freedom of the Press to do so. Second, if there is reasonable cause to believe that a publisher is releasing distorted information at the direction of a hostile government in order influence a US election then a) my judgment is that they are not a member of the Press, and b) if applicable, I want to see them get the trial they are entitled to receive for their actions. Third, there is a difference between reporting on confidential, even secret, information, and using and distorting that information in a targeted manner for a predetermined or desired outcome at the hands of a terrorist group or State actor. The former is the action of the Press, and the latter is espionage. In other words, are Wikileaks/Assange acting as an espionage group rather than some kind of white hat hacker brigade for the common weal? If so, fuck them. I am not required to protect them in order to protect the Press. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/282 "2018-11-16T20:23:50Z")
> [@Sunny\_Daze](#): > > **CarnalK** I have no idea what you’re saying there. Frame job? No frame job? Are you saying that Snowden and Assange are or are not equivalent? > > To return to the earlier question, why would the US need to ask Sweden to create a rape charge in order to extradite Assange? How can that possibly be confusing? No, they are not equivalent. A frame job to get someone out of an allied Western country is not equivalent to a frame job to get someone out of Russia. A lone man who blows the whistle is not equivalent to a guy who runs an organization for the purpose of (selective) whistle blowing. And I didn’t say they would need a frame job to extradite him, I said the optics look better to extradite a rapist leaker rather than just a leaker. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/283 "2018-11-16T21:02:14Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > A frame job to get someone out of an allied Western country is not equivalent to a frame job to get someone out of Russia. Yes, a frame job to get someone out of Russia is MORE plausible on its face, because: 1. US can’t extradite someone from Russia, but they can extradite someone from, say, Austria or whatever EU country you wish. 2. US CAN extradite someone from the UK, and it is basically no more or less difficult to extradite from Sweden > [@](#): > > And I didn’t say they would need a frame job to extradite him, I said the optics look better to extradite a rapist leaker rather than just a leaker. Again, this is just made-up nonsense. There’s been enough people extradited on controversial grounds to say with confidence that the United States doesn’t need to make some unidentified audience feeeeeeel better through optics to enforce the terms of a treaty. The US can just insist that the other country hold up their end of the bargain, as legally required. Mind you, I’m not totally satisfied that Assange has actually committed a crime, in that generally being a piece of shit isn’t a violation of title 18 of the United States Code. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/284 "2018-11-16T21:48:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Yes, a frame job to get someone out of Russia is MORE plausible on its face, because: > > 1. US can’t extradite someone from Russia, but they can extradite someone from, say, Austria or whatever EU country you wish. > 2. US CAN extradite someone from the UK, and it is basically no more or less difficult to extradite from Sweden That makes absolutely no sense. There is no point setting up a frame job where extradition is unlikely, as in the case of Snowden/Russia. I have no idea where you’re even coming from here. I quite clearly said that extraditing someone under a rape investigation would have better optics than just scooping them up out of the blue. You’re basically saying a useless frame job is more plausible than a useful one. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/285 "2018-11-16T21:55:22Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > My question after all of this is, what the heck is Ecuador getting out of all of this that would make them want to house him all of this time? The government of Ecuador is not a fan of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/286 "2018-11-16T21:59:28Z")
Ravenman, you seem to be leaning heavy on the fact that the US could simply ask the UK to hand him over and ignoring the idea that Sweden handing him over under the cloud of a rape allegation would make Assange look a lot worse. A rather infantile view, imho. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/287 "2018-11-16T22:00:19Z")
> [@Sunny\_Daze](#): > > Of course I can question the information supplied by any publisher. I should do so, in fact. I don’t see it as an assault of the Freedom of the Press to do so. Second, if there is reasonable cause to believe that a publisher is releasing distorted information at the direction of a hostile government in order influence a US election then a) my judgment is that they are not a member of the Press, and b) if applicable, I want to see them get the trial they are entitled to receive for their actions. Third, there is a difference between reporting on confidential, even secret, information, and using and distorting that information in a targeted manner for a predetermined or desired outcome at the hands of a terrorist group or State actor. The former is the action of the Press, and the latter is espionage. > > In other words, are Wikileaks/Assange acting as an espionage group rather than some kind of white hat hacker brigade for the common weal? If so, fuck them. I am not required to protect them in order to protect the Press. Popular speech doesn’t need protection. Only unpopular speech requires protection. None of your claims address the precedent set in the case against Assange, a precedent that could affect mainstream news publications. They can’t. They can’t because the charges are classified. Once they are revealed, it is a legal question what sort of precedents would follow by hypothetical decisions against Assange. Personally, I’ll have to wait to see what the ACLU says. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/288 "2018-11-16T22:15:30Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > That makes absolutely no sense. There is no point setting up a frame job where extradition is unlikely, as in the case of Snowden/Russia. I have no idea where you’re even coming from here. Yeah, I think the problem is that you may not understand a few facts. Russia may extradite non Russians to certain countries, including many EU countries. It will not extradite non Russians to the US. So if a country with an extradition agreement with Russia says Snowden is wanted for a serious crime in their territory, Russia may have to take that request seriously. If Snowden were extradited to that EU country, Snowden night then be subject to extradition to the US. This bounce pass is exactly what you’re alleging Assange is subject to… except that the UK has a legal obligation to extradite to the US and Russia has a legal obligation not to extradite to the US. How can you not understand this? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/289 "2018-11-16T22:22:13Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Ravenman, you seem to be leaning heavy on the fact that the US could simply ask the UK to hand him over and ignoring the idea that Sweden handing him over under the cloud of a rape allegation would make Assange look a lot worse. A rather infantile view, imho. The idea that a cloud is needed to extradite Assange is an idea from some other planet. Seriously, it’s nuts The Obama Administration prosecuted significant numbers of leakers without framing them of rape. Why weren’t all those leakers framed for violent crimes in order to make the “optics” look better for their prosecution? Answer: because it’s a crazy idea that such optics matter. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/290 "2018-11-16T22:38:09Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > The idea that a cloud is needed to extradite Assange is an idea from some other planet. Seriously, it’s nuts > > The Obama Administration prosecuted significant numbers of leakers without framing them of rape. Why weren’t all those leakers framed for violent crimes in order to make the “optics” look better for their prosecution? > > Answer: because it’s a crazy idea that such optics matter. I guess in your bubble that’s true. I’m not sure Sweden or the the UK populations would have agreed. Because you see, the fact that Obama chose to prosecute other leakers would have had less impact on Swedish and UK voters, when evaluating their government’s decision to hand someone over, than you seem to think. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/291 "2018-11-16T22:46:08Z")
You seem to be thinking that I believe some frame up is required for an extradition. I don’t think that because that’s stupid. I’m saying a frame up is useful to give friendly governments cover for an extradition, which you seem to be kinda clueless about. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 16, 2018, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/292 "2018-11-16T22:56:33Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > I guess in your bubble that’s true. I’m not sure Sweden or the the UK populations would have agreed. Because you see, the fact that Obama chose to prosecute other leakers would have had less impact on Swedish and UK voters, when evaluating their government’s decision to hand someone over, than you seem to think. My bubble is called planet Earth, thank you very much. The perception in the UK or Sweden is irrelevant. The three countries have legal obligations that make feeeeeeelings like you cite totally irrelevant. Besides, how stupid do you think Brits and Swedes are that they would say, “Oh, Assange is being extradited to face charges relating to Wikileaks. I’d normally oppose such a thing, but since he was accused of sex crimes, that changes EVERYTHING!” Give me a break. But please explain to me how you think this conspiracy to frame Assange worked. Do you suppose Obama chose the crime he’d be framed for? And then did Joe Biden make a secret “October surprise” mission to Stockholm to convince local prosecutors to join the conspiracy? Were the accusers actually sleeper CIA agents? And most importantly, did the same conspirators later say, “Hey, we framed Assange for sexual assault, let’s do the same for Judge Kavanaugh!” Lay it on me man. Tell me how deep this Qanon like rabbit hole goes. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/293 "2018-11-17T00:04:14Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > My bubble is called planet Earth, thank you very much. > > The perception in the UK or Sweden is irrelevant. The three countries have legal obligations that make feeeeeeelings like you cite totally irrelevant. See, here is where you display how clueless you are. Sweden and the UK have elections. People’s “feeeeeeelings” come into effect. Leaders of allied democracies, unlike yourself and Trump, understand that. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/294 "2018-11-17T01:30:49Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > See, here is where you display how clueless you are. Sweden and the UK have elections. People’s “feeeeeeelings” come into effect. Leaders of allied democracies, unlike yourself and Trump, understand that. I’m wondering what you think that has to do with anything. What do elections have to do with extradition treaties, rape, and espionage? Please answer that second, but the Qanon-like conspiracy theory that you subscribe to is definitely a higher priority for an answer. ---
**Author:** ![Sunny\_Daze](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sunny_daze/32/438_2.png) [@Sunny\_Daze](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sunny_Daze)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 2:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/295 "2018-11-17T02:49:51Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Popular speech doesn’t need protection. Only unpopular speech requires protection. > > None of your claims address the precedent set in the case against Assange, a precedent that could affect mainstream news publications. They can’t. They can’t because the charges are classified. Once they are revealed, it is a legal question what sort of precedents would follow by hypothetical decisions against Assange. Personally, I’ll have to wait to see what the ACLU says. I agree with the overall sentiment that speech, popular and unpopular, should be protected. I do find it ironic that I think I know enough to label Assange as a spy because of the activities of the press. I also take anything he says with enormous skepticism. I find that I object to the hacking and other shenanigans. I don’t dispute his right to say things, however. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/296 "2018-11-17T03:07:56Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I’m wondering what you think that has to do with anything. What do elections have to do with extradition treaties, rape, and espionage? > > Please answer that second, but the Qanon-like conspiracy theory that you subscribe to is definitely a higher priority for an answer. Uh huh. Thinking the U.S. might have leaned on the Swedes a bit is a “Qanon-like” conspiracy? Yeah, I’m the whacko. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/297 "2018-11-17T03:33:23Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > Uh huh. Thinking the U.S. might have leaned on the Swedes a bit is a “Qanon-like” conspiracy? Yeah, I’m the whacko. I repeat: your roll eyes emoji continues to be the most sound of the weak arguments you have brought here. Stick with your “strong” points, such as they are. ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/298 "2018-11-17T03:39:20Z")
Everyone is missing the point. The extradition to Sweden was about legal issues. In the UK an extradition request would be fought through all the courts, all the way up to the European Court of Justice. (This whole issue started long before Brexit.) Assange would argue that he is a journalist, and he would base his case on freedom of speech, whistleblowing, etc. and the outcome would be doubtful. The extradition request could be denied. In Sweden, on the other hand, the government could hand him over to the US without going through the courts. Currently, the situation is that if Assange steps out of the embassy the extradition request would still go through all the courts, but he will be in a UK prison for years while it is doing so. ---
**Author:** ![GreenWyvern](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/greenwyvern/32/2834_2.png) [@GreenWyvern](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GreenWyvern)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/299 "2018-11-17T03:55:07Z")
And the US would certainly not have to lean on the Swedish government. Sweden and the US have been cooperating smoothly on security matters for decades. The Swedish government would cheerfully hand over Assange to the US, as would the British government. However, in the UK the courts have a say in the matter, in Sweden they don’t. ---
**Author:** ![BigT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bigt/32/12044_2.png) [@BigT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BigT)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2018, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210/300 "2018-11-17T03:56:01Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > Popular speech doesn’t need protection. Only unpopular speech requires protection. > > None of your claims address the precedent set in the case against Assange, a precedent that could affect mainstream news publications. They can’t. They can’t because the charges are classified. Once they are revealed, it is a legal question what sort of precedents would follow by hypothetical decisions against Assange. Personally, I’ll have to wait to see what the ACLU says. This isn’t about popular or unpopular speech. It’s not even about releasing redacted secret info. It’s now about releasing illegally obtained information in an attempt to harm our elections. It’s about being an arm of the Russian cyber military. The second he crossed over to that, he lost the support from those of us who supported the transparency aspects. And I can very much support the precedent that you shouldn’t report on info illegally obtained. Since a lot of this info is info from hacking, I can support that. If someone else who isn’t connected with Wikileaks says that these laws go beyond that, then I’ll give their argument a listen. Until then, I’m for shutting down Wikileaks. If they’d not played around with espionage (as Sunny Daze put it), I might be on their side. But now they lost both sides. Maybe don’t try to get an enemy of the press elected if you want the press on your side. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210.md?page=14) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/julian-assange-remember-him-update/745210.md?page=16)