ASSANGE BLINKS: Wikileaks founder retreats from extradition pledge

a reply to: Xcathdra

Thank you.

a reply to: loveguy

Your missing the point. A Conspiracy charge is directed at the fact more than one person participated in the crime. The evidence required to show a conspiracy would be Manning having access to said information, obtaining said info and giving it to Assange. Assange, as the second person, knowingly received classified info and posted it to wikileaks.

The requirement is to show more than one person was involved.

Essentially, imo, a conspiracy charge is an extra charge, just like "armed criminal action" in my state. Its an felony that can be used when a person commits a crime involving a fire arm. For instance if the suspect shoots another person they can be charged with murder as well as armed criminal action.

You run into the issues of whats called a "lesser included offense" so some crimes were removed and defined as a separate crime.

An example, again in my state, of a lesser included offense would be burglary. In order to burglarize a home a person also has to trespass to do it. The person can be either charged with burglary or with trespassing but not both because trespassing is a lesser included offense of burglary.

Here is the generic US code for Conspiracy -

18 U.S. Code § 371 - Conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud United States

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both.

If, however, the offense, the commission of which is the object of the conspiracy, is a misdemeanor only, the punishment for such conspiracy shall not exceed the maximum punishment provided for such misdemeanor.

A - 2 or more persons = Manning and Assange
B - Commit an offense against the US - illegally accessing, obtaining and then transferring classified material to another person not authorized to have the items.
B2 - Illegally placing those classified documents into a realm where they can then be accessed by people who are not authorized to have them.

make more sense?

a reply to: loveguy

The documents were authentic.

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: Xcathdra

Thank you.

No problem...

Its one of those situations where as an arresting officer on another agencies warrant my involvement was extremely limited so there was not much to tell. Hence the reason I had to use a favor to find out what was going on.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Not that anyone did not see this coming. Apparently he is moving the goal post to back out of his offer. As someone else noted I think this damages his credibility. Apparently one of his lawyers still maintains he will follow through. Someone missed a memo somewhere.

The Assange 'move' is nothing but blowing smoke up the proverbial backside.

The US has made NO attempt to have him extradited. It is SWEDEN that wants him in SWEDEN to answer sexual assault charges.

It would be easier for the US to get him from the UK than from Sweden. Sweden WILL NOT extradite persons from Sweden to any country where they might face the death penalty.

Assange is in no danger of being extradited to to the US, he knows it, and any 'offers' like this one is just 100% theater.

a reply to: rnaa

Assange has not committed any crimes in the US that carry the death penalty. That bs came from his lawyers when they tried to fight swedish extradition. Its up there with the lies he would be sent to Gitmo (he cant) and that he would be charged with treason (he cant).

a reply to: Xcathdra

That is my point.

He hasn't committed any crimes (Capital crimes or not) in the USA that interests the USA in having him extradited. If there were it would be easier to get him out of the UK than it would Sweden (capital crime or not). If the USA wanted him, they would not be sitting on their hands waiting for him to be sent to Sweden.

He is NOT in danger of being extradited to the USA. Period. There is no extradition threat for him to agree to.

Offering to agree to extradition to the USA is pure theater; nothing more, nothing less.

By the way, the 'lies' that the lawyers dreamed up are exactly why he is no longer represented by the BEST civil rights lawyer IN THE WORLD, Geoffrey Robinson (who, like Assange, is an Australian). Robinson is the best because he doesn't mess around with lies and deception and doesn't put up with it. He knows how to spin a story, sure, but he doesn't put up with straight lies and he just wouldn't put up with Assange's crap.

So he punked out, I don’t blame him because they will skin his ass if they get him, but in the future he should refrain from these self righteous phony pledges.

a reply to: rnaa

Violation of the espionage act by releasing hundreds of thousands of classified documents showing no illegal activity says otherwise. Secondly I dont know where people are getting their info but media is not immune from criminal proceedings for publishing the info. The Pentagon papers supreme court decision and the subsequent prosecution of the 2 journalists involved says otherwise (for those who try to argue the media / journalist bs).

a reply to: Xcathdra

What is your point?

The US has expressed no interest in getting Assange onto US soil. NONE.

If they wanted him they would have started extradition proceedings against him already. If he is sent to Sweden it is MUCH, MUCH harder to get him extradited.

That is FACT.

Assange is acting out a role for the theater of the exercise.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Good morning.

to defraud United States...

of secret documents implicating those defrauding the US citizens...

B2 - Illegally placing those classified documents into a realm where they can then be accessed by people who are not authorized to have them.

Documents of that nature are not justifiable if a nation portrays duty, and integrity.

There should be zero people defending the classified documents...the actions found on wikileaks site are not justifiable as classified information. Anyone who believes those actions are justifiable belong in a mental ward.

Wikileaks site exhibits deplorable people doing deplorable things...Assange ain't the bogeyman, get over it.
The contents on wikileaks site do not belong in the hands of those who wish to keep certain truths/atrocities hidden from public view. As tax-payers the gov. is beholden to us, not the other way around.

Without a pardon for Assange, he will go down in history as a justifiable informant/a teacher of justice and integrity...no matter how the story gets spun. Will he be called to answer for the sex charges what so ever?

Did you catch the inauguration address this morning? It's the first inauguration I ever sat through...finally someone stands as a leader who intends to bring justice to the forefront. That's what I got out of it, so we'll see together what his vision of greatness means. Hopefully there is a happy medium for all of our differing viewpoints.

a reply to: Xcathdra

The documents were authentic.

Thank you.

Defending information of wrong-doing is worse than revealing it.

a reply to: loveguy

please point out what documents manning released to wikileaks show illegal activity.

originally posted by: loveguy
a reply to: Xcathdra

The documents were authentic.

Thank you.

Defending information of wrong-doing is worse than revealing it.

and trying to say the documents show wrong doing when they dont is a desperate attempt to exonerate 2 people who broke the law.

originally posted by: buster2010
Once a lying running coward always a lying running coward. Anyone that thought he would actually go through with this is a fool.

Not sure how you can come to the coward conclusion with someone who is actively exposing government corruption. To me that takes some fairly big brass ones.

Remind me again...
During this last election cycle what side was ones wearing masks throwing rocks at the cops?

a reply to: Xcathdra

I really dont see the problem. He got what he wanted soooo.....

Why does he need to do anything?

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: Xcathdra

I really dont see the problem. He got what he wanted soooo.....

Why does he need to do anything?

He said he would.

a reply to: Xcathdra

No I do get it. Its just that there is nothing making him do anything. He already has what he wanted.

There are no rules........

a reply to: tadaman

or credibility...

a reply to: Xcathdra

He is already a rapist right? Now he is a liar in the eyes of government?

Drone him or call the cops as they say. To the rest of the world he just a got a person out of imprisonment.