4 ms·

If this case is indeed politically motivated, one would expect the US to lose interest on January 21 and drop the case instead of appealing to the Supreme Court

If this case is indeed politically motivated, one would expect the US to lose interest on January 21 and drop the case instead of appealing to the Supreme Court.

AsyncAwait 6y ago
Most of the people in the intelligence community and beyond who hate being challenged will stay at their posts way past that date, not that Biden has a different take here.
- HotHotLava 6y ago
  Why would the intelligence community be involved with decision-making inside the department of justice? And Obama's DoJ apparently decided not to pursue the case, why would we expect Biden's DoJ to come to a different conclusion? It's also interesting that this case has so many overlapping conspiracy theories that I don't even know if my initial comment is downvoted by US patriots for suggesting that the case might be politically motivated (which is the assertion made by Assanges defence team and many human rights groups), or by Assange supporters for suggesting that there was no ongoing investigation in 2010 and the Swedish allegations were not a plot by the DoJ :)
  - AsyncAwait 6y ago
    > Why would the intelligence community be involved with decision-making inside the department of justice? Because the intelligence community hates Assange and what he represents. They spied on US lawmakers, tortured, manufactured evidence... I find it hard to believe they WOULDN'T meddle in this case. > Obama's DoJ apparently decided not to pursue the case, why would we expect Biden's DoJ to come to a different conclusion? Because post 2016 election the Democrats are no friends of Assange and WiliLeaks, regardless of the implications for press freedom.
tsimionescu 6y ago
"Political motivation" does not mean that the motivation must be associated with only 1 political party. There are many political decisions taken in the US that both parties agree on, especially in this area of the intelligence state. If anything, as the judge notes, the current administration was likely somewhat more "friendly" to Assange than the Biden administration will be.
- HotHotLava 6y ago
  I'm confused: The Assange defense team literally argues that the Obama DoJ decided not to prosecute the case, and that the Trump administration resurrected it in 2017 for political reasons. (The judge rejects the premise and argues that since there is no sufficient evidence that the Obama DoJ decided not to prosecute, the Trump administration couldn't have made a political decision to resurrect, since the case was always ongoing.) Your position seems to be that the defense is mistaken, but that the case is still political because it was already started as that under Obama and continues to be politically motivated throughout the Trump and Biden administrations?
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    Exactly. The case against Assange has always been political - it is not to the benefit of Justice or the American People, it is a case for protection of the surveillance state, and a case designed to scare away anyone who might emulate Assange. Same as the case against Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden.

If this case is indeed politically motivated, one would expect the US to lose interest on January 21 and drop the case instead of appealing to the Supreme Court.

AsyncAwait 6y ago

Most of the people in the intelligence community and beyond who hate being challenged will stay at their posts way past that date, not that Biden has a different take here.

HotHotLava 6y ago
Why would the intelligence community be involved with decision-making inside the department of justice? And Obama's DoJ apparently decided not to pursue the case, why would we expect Biden's DoJ to come to a different conclusion? It's also interesting that this case has so many overlapping conspiracy theories that I don't even know if my initial comment is downvoted by US patriots for suggesting that the case might be politically motivated (which is the assertion made by Assanges defence team and many human rights groups), or by Assange supporters for suggesting that there was no ongoing investigation in 2010 and the Swedish allegations were not a plot by the DoJ :)
- AsyncAwait 6y ago
  > Why would the intelligence community be involved with decision-making inside the department of justice? Because the intelligence community hates Assange and what he represents. They spied on US lawmakers, tortured, manufactured evidence... I find it hard to believe they WOULDN'T meddle in this case. > Obama's DoJ apparently decided not to pursue the case, why would we expect Biden's DoJ to come to a different conclusion? Because post 2016 election the Democrats are no friends of Assange and WiliLeaks, regardless of the implications for press freedom.

tsimionescu 6y ago

"Political motivation" does not mean that the motivation must be associated with only 1 political party. There are many political decisions taken in the US that both parties agree on, especially in this area of the intelligence state. If anything, as the judge notes, the current administration was likely somewhat more "friendly" to Assange than the Biden administration will be.

HotHotLava 6y ago
I'm confused: The Assange defense team literally argues that the Obama DoJ decided not to prosecute the case, and that the Trump administration resurrected it in 2017 for political reasons. (The judge rejects the premise and argues that since there is no sufficient evidence that the Obama DoJ decided not to prosecute, the Trump administration couldn't have made a political decision to resurrect, since the case was always ongoing.) Your position seems to be that the defense is mistaken, but that the case is still political because it was already started as that under Obama and continues to be politically motivated throughout the Trump and Biden administrations?
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  Exactly. The case against Assange has always been political - it is not to the benefit of Justice or the American People, it is a case for protection of the surveillance state, and a case designed to scare away anyone who might emulate Assange. Same as the case against Chelsea Manning or Edward Snowden.