Judge: Next I’m to consider whether the offenses in the request would be offenses in the UK as well as in the US. Mr Assange’s conduct went beyond that of a journalist, in agreeing to help Ms Manning crack a password
This is not a valid argument. I've read the legal case against Assange from the US myself. Assange never cracked the password and there's no evidence he tried. He just said he would pass it on to their guy to have a look at. It charges Assange with entering into an agreement with Manning for Manning to provide sensitive material in exchange for Assange cracking the password. This agreement simply never happened.
Virtually every charge is based on inferring things from a chat transcript that were never said and that may not have even been Assange speaking. It's disturbingly similar to the Trump impeachment attempt which also claimed quid quo pro but Trump never actually said that.
Notice the judge does not actually specify a crime.
judge: Disclosing the govt files was a multi-step process. If they had successfully cracked the password, Manning could have perused files anonymously and would have been harder to detect
Assange never disclosed the password.
Judge: For months Assange had been communicating with Manning. When told she had nothing left to give him, he said ‘curious eyes never run dry.’ After this comment she downloaded 100s of 1000s of State Dept cables
Notice the judge does not actually specify a crime. Is it a crime to say I'm sure you'll find more?
Judge refers to Mr Assange’s ‘indiscriminate’ release of State Dept cables, contrasts with redacted cables published by other media outlets
I don't know a huge deal about that but didn't we just have proof on here that wasn't Assange?
Judge seems to be potentially justifying spying on Assange because CNN reported that Assange had turned the embassy into a ‘command post’ for election meddling
That's judicial misconduct. One of the judges prime responsibilities is to not allow the case to be prejudiced by external sources.
Judge: I have no reason to doubt the constitutional protections available in the US would ensure a fair trial
I'm very suspicious of this. I'm not sure the US is obligated to give Assange any rights. He's not a US citizen or a UK citizen.
"This court trusts that a US court will properly consider Mr Assange’s constitutional right to free speech"
Judge: Therefore I rule it would be unjust to extradite Mr Assange. The US has the right to appeal.
I am shocked at that turn around. It has precedence with McKinnon but after the initial flawed arguments. On the other hand this may be part of bargaining and delay. If the US appeals then it would presumably just agree not to send him to FDX Florence. Some of the arguments made for McKinnon may be harder to make with Assange.
Sometimes being wrong is good. Though I'm still very cautious. The judge has basically ruled the US charges valid but they are not and the McKinnon defence is a fallback. The US will almost certainly appeal and will be better equipped to confront that defence second time around. The McKinnon defence was also settled in an unusual way. It relied on him being away from his family and home. He's also not a UK citizen so there might not be so much concern for him. That's for Australia to wrangle with the US over. In Assange's case, the judge basically established that for Assange that's not a problem. All the appeal may need to do is say they're going to put Assange on suicide watch and not put him in extreme isolation, maybe promise to give him the Breivik treatment. It will probably fall down to Priti Patel.
Live from an account that wont have access to their phone in the courtroom?
https://mobile.twitter.com/DefenseAssange/status/1346037560657768449
This is not a valid argument. I've read the legal case against Assange from the US myself. Assange never cracked the password and there's no evidence he tried. He just said he would pass it on to their guy to have a look at. It charges Assange with entering into an agreement with Manning for Manning to provide sensitive material in exchange for Assange cracking the password. This agreement simply never happened.
Virtually every charge is based on inferring things from a chat transcript that were never said and that may not have even been Assange speaking. It's disturbingly similar to the Trump impeachment attempt which also claimed quid quo pro but Trump never actually said that.
Notice the judge does not actually specify a crime.
Assange never disclosed the password.
Notice the judge does not actually specify a crime. Is it a crime to say I'm sure you'll find more?
I don't know a huge deal about that but didn't we just have proof on here that wasn't Assange?
That's judicial misconduct. One of the judges prime responsibilities is to not allow the case to be prejudiced by external sources.
I'm very suspicious of this. I'm not sure the US is obligated to give Assange any rights. He's not a US citizen or a UK citizen.
I am shocked at that turn around. It has precedence with McKinnon but after the initial flawed arguments. On the other hand this may be part of bargaining and delay. If the US appeals then it would presumably just agree not to send him to FDX Florence. Some of the arguments made for McKinnon may be harder to make with Assange.
Unfortunately I'm fairly confident they're going to extradite him. He's basically gone.
A little birdie told me he is to be gifted to Biden for favourable trade treatment, etc.
Sometimes being wrong is good. Though I'm still very cautious. The judge has basically ruled the US charges valid but they are not and the McKinnon defence is a fallback. The US will almost certainly appeal and will be better equipped to confront that defence second time around. The McKinnon defence was also settled in an unusual way. It relied on him being away from his family and home. He's also not a UK citizen so there might not be so much concern for him. That's for Australia to wrangle with the US over. In Assange's case, the judge basically established that for Assange that's not a problem. All the appeal may need to do is say they're going to put Assange on suicide watch and not put him in extreme isolation, maybe promise to give him the Breivik treatment. It will probably fall down to Priti Patel.
Judge: Therefore I rule it would be unjust to extradite Mr Assange. The US has the right to appeal.
EXTRADITION DENIED!!!