Posted on 12/07/2010 6:13:38 AM PST by FS11
The US has an extradition treaty with Sweden since the 1960s, when the nations agreed to "make more effective the co-operation of the two countries in the repression of crime".
Extradition under the treaty is likely to face a number of obstacles, not least the fact that the likely charges facing Assange in the US – under the Espionage Act or other legislation protecting national security – are not included in the exhaustive list of offences set out in the law.
There may also be issues of jurisdiction, since the offences Assange is alleged by the US to have conducted did not take place within the country. However, with other cases involving alleged cybercrimes, such as the case pending against computer hacker Gary McKinnon, the US has claimed that entering its computer systems remotely constitutes an offence it has jurisdiction to prosecute.
Even if Assange's case falls outside the remit of Sweden's treaty with the US, there is scope for the country to agree to his extradition to the US.
(Excerpt) Read more at guardian.co.uk ...
One experiences a great deal of difficulty expressing what one thinks of this character while remaining within the rules of this web site.
I’m wondering what is the evidence that he has broken ANY US law.
“One experiences a great deal of difficulty expressing what one thinks of this character while remaining within the rules of this web site.”
With guys like Obama and Asssange you can say that again.
What law has Assange broken in the US?
Simply distributing classified information is not a crime in the US, unless you have a security clearance and have agreed not to do so.
The government would have to prosecute under the Espionage Act, and that's a pretty high threshold to meet -- especially when all of the information released so far hasn't been surprising to anyone that has been paying attention.
We don't need no stinkin' evidence. Get out of the way you traiterous person. We should ban you from FR for asking such silly little questions. We don't need no stinkin' laws either. The guy is a traiter, or well, he is a spy, or well something. HE made us look bad (forget the 1000s of officials who made this all happen).
To be clear, the more I read, the more I dislike the guy. He is no friend to our country or to our people. But I think the real problem is that State let this stuff get out of their control.
The question remains, is there evidence he broke any US laws. If not, what is Holder talking about? Assange’s honeytrap problems suggest there may be few LEGALISTIC ways to deal with him.
Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation...
I don't know how you prove intent, when there is the clear motive that the US's bumbling incompetence is doing grave injury to the world and the knowledge of this fact is benefitial to the welfare and security of the People.
Watch Obama and Clintoon carefully — lest they trade Cheney to Nigeria for Assange from Sweden.
One has the feeling that, in light of his activities, the letter of the law is immaterial.
I would not raise such an argument, naturally.
Up until recently, I wondered the same. Assange may have screwed himself when he made the comment that if he were to be arrested or killed, more critical information would be released - this kind of bargaining could be considered blackmail - 1. the act of attempting to obtain money by intimidation, as by threats to disclose discreditable information; 2. the exertion of pressure or threats, esp unfairly, in an attempt to influence someone’s actions - or conspiracy to commit blackmail. Not a lawyer, just my two cents...
Oh the irony of catching a leaker because of a leaky condom..........
Having read the Telegraph article on the Swedish charges, Assange is guilty of nothing in Sweden. The entire matter there is political.
State relinquished control of their classified material at the insistence of Donald Rumsfeld when he was SecDef. That has since been changed.
This mother^%$$# better not be Time’s Man of the Year. All hell is gonna break loose. Now we know for sure who the enemy is!!!!
Judge Napolitano was on Foxnews this morning saying it is not rape...
23 posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2010 6:21:47 AM by Red in Blue PA
Now isn’t this odd.
Why would we want him extradited to the US, where he will be given a trial in our criminal court system with all the evidentiary rules tilted in favor of protecting the accused? So soon after the debacle that so aptly demostrated the futility of trying war criminals in our civilian criminal court system, it would be much better to let Assange hang out in some other court system where he is not as protected.
Why would we want him extradited to the US, where he will be given a trial in our criminal court system with all the evidentiary rules tilted in favor of protecting the accused? So soon after the debacle that so aptly demostrated the futility of trying war criminals in our civilian criminal court system, it would be much better to let Assange hang out in some other court system where he is not as protected.
18 posted on Tuesday, December 07, 2010 9:32:39 AM by VRWCmember
It is odd. After reading the possible charges, I would add that Sweden has created an insanely Gramscian society.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.