3 ms·
I don’t think you will see any real discussion on those points until it goes to trial. The case here barely touched on those things at all, and if that’s the en
by cormacrelf 5y ago
I don’t think you will see any real discussion on those points until it goes to trial. The case here barely touched on those things at all, and if that’s the entire frame you have, then you are missing that extradition is a matter of international relations over anything else. You’re talking about the US as “the government” but Assange and US are before the UK courts.
> they went straight to trying to punish Assange with dirty tricks… no plans to improve
I take “they” to mean the US, right?
> That speaks to a pervasive lack of integrity, and so has undermined confidence in the fairness of these legal proceedings.
The US’ “dirty tricks” somehow implicate the UK court system and the integrity of their judges? This is the exact illogical step I was referring to from the last thread. If you do not understand that the Americans are in a UK court, asking another sovereign power to let them have him, you should not be commenting on it at all. Even if you made the argument that the UK’s government employed dirty tricks too, you would be ignoring the fact that their democracy has an incredibly rigid separation between executive and judicial power. Your understanding has lumped together the American executive government with the UK judiciary, which would be a stunning display of ignorance were we not on the Orange Website, where it is just the usual amount of ignorance.
- smolder 5y agoI'm ignorant of a lot of detail here (though not that the US is arguing to the UK for extradition) but let me explain: I'm lumping the US and UK together only to the extent that I think their intelligence services work together on things (they do) and their power/influence is kind of super-legal; it crosses borders and ignores laws. Dirty tricks would include having apparently fake rape charges made against him, also in a country that wasn't the US. When I said "these legal proceedings" I did mean everything, across jurisdictions, up to the point where the US gets their way and prosecutes him. I'm not saying the UK judge is complicit, but the outcome may still not be beyond influence.