You're viewing a single thread.
the whole plan is to get him over here and then kill him or let him die of neglect.
May as well get in early.
Julian Assange didn't kill himself.
A lot like Gary Webb.
The US hasn't executed someone under espionage charges since the Rosenbergs.
Do you want to buy a bridge?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_site
But in such things, the german version is usually more detailed.
Formally anyway...
I suspect they’d prefer that he die in prison over there, but if not then in prison over here. I don’t think they want to ever take this to trial, because it’s been a farce from the start.
They literally dropped all the potentially credible charges they were first going for. Those women in Sweden? Long gone, as of 5 years ago. Hillary Clinton's emails? Also dropped.
What really sucks is that the narrative has changed over years, as the facts have been forgotten. People think he's been in league with Russia, and some even think Russia provided him with evidence against Republicans alongside the Democrat emails, and that he refused to publish the Republican stuff in support of Russia so that Russia's man (Trump) could get in the White House.
First off, Russia wouldn't provide Republican emails if they were trying to get a Republican inside the White House (they didn't provide any such emails and they did promote Trump). Second, the controversy as about Wikileaks not publishing details of Russian corruption. While this is definitely controversial (and frankly something I disagree with), Wikileaks' reasoning was simply: "Russian corruption is not news, it is to be expected".
Those two women from Sweden were not prostitutes (and even if, it wouldn't matter) and have themselves backtracked from pressing charges. They are also victims of this entire farce and have been instrumentalized.
Fair point, I meant to change that before I posted. I think I was getting confused with Trump and the prostitutes that peed on him.
Well, Epstein's cell is empty at the moment.
Does the uk not have a law against executions and if so would the not be breaking said law by extraditing him.
That's exactly what they're arguing here. However the US is trying to use a non-answer to avoid this, and in the past that's worked.
Well doesnt that just fill you with confidence.
Well, can't send him there then, right?
Regardless of any judicial or legal red tape preventing that extradition, are we seriously operating under the assumption that the United States government would execute him?
are we seriously operating under the assumption that the United States government would execute him?
Legally, UK and EU courts must consider this, because sending someone to a country where they will be executed for their crimes is a breach of human rights.
By the strict reading of the law, he could be extradited for life in prison. If he was being extradited to be sentenced to death, that would be a no go.
The US are skirting and pushing the bounds of UK law here. Unfortunately, they will likely get away with it, because the English are pussies.
because the English are pussies
You spelled complicit wrong...
I don't like Julian Assange, but I think that if he were found guilty of his crimes of espionage, that he has already served out more than a proportional sentence in exile.