The Equadorian president Moreno didn&#x27;t like Wikileaks publishing the INA papers that have lead to accusations of corruption against him.  Assange could prbably have forseen that would endanger his asylum but published anyway, kudos to him.

Hard to imagine how that would have ended any other way really. No benefit for the Ecuadorians in man-handling him, he wasn’t going to leave of his own accord, and the Brits (proooobably) weren’t going to storm the place.Pity whomever has to fumigate the room.

He jumped bail while accused of a serious crime.  Not sure what you are looking for here.

Free press does not mean it&#x27;s free from any agenda. Rather, it means that anyone with an agenda has the freedom to express their point of view.The main idea that the only agenda accepted publicly are not those presented by the government, hence making the intellectual atmosphere a bit more robust and less sterile.The point why &quot;western press is better than russias&quot; is not about truth but rather inviting an atmosphere where many voices can be heard.

&gt; no doubt he will be extradited to the US.Some doubt, I think. We&#x27;ll see.

&gt;no doubt he will be extradited to the US. This has been the game plan all along.I thought the game plan was to extradite him from Sweden via false rape allegations because it was too difficult to extradite him from the UK?Assange apologists are remarkably facile at respinning their conspiracy theories to adapt to the circumstances.

no doubt he will be extradited to the US. This has been the game plan all along.Free press my ass. The UK and US are fucking banana republics. The problem is that thanks to them controlling the biggest propaganda machine which has ever existed, their stinky ideas constantly rub off on other Western countries.Anyone from the US still pointing the finger at China or Russia for being non democratic, not free, backward or whatever, deserves exactly what is coming.

Being a citizen is not relevant to whether it&#x27;s an extradition. &quot;Extradition is an act where one jurisdiction delivers a person accused or convicted of committing a crime in another jurisdiction&quot;. The Ecuadorian embassy doesn&#x27;t have its own jurisdiction.

He has been a citizen of Ecuador since 2017. This was an extradition.

&gt; Ecuadorian embassy withdrew his asylum and UK police were invited in to arrest him.According to a journalist at Sky news <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NewsTMac&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116274082922803200" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;NewsTMac&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116274082922803200</a>

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Non-refoulement" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Non-refoulement</a>

Revoking his asylum could be in violation of Ecuadorian law.(But IANAL specialized in Ecuadorian asylum law)

He&#x27;s an Ecuadorian citizen. Does the Ecuadorian law allow for the extradition of Ecuadorian citizens? It&#x27;s quite common for this to be illegal.Of course this wouldn&#x27;t be your typical extradition as he was already on UK ground, but I think it would not be unreasonable for a court to view this as an extradition.

“illegally terminated”That’s not how that works

&gt; Likewise if Ecuador believes that there is no threat to Assange that can revoke it.Thats a stretch considering they invited the police to arrest him.

He has been a citizen of Ecuador since 2017. That&#x27;s quite different to only having asylum status.

Of course Ecuador can revoke asylum.It&#x27;s very common practice around the world if a person&#x27;s circumstances change and their original country is now safe. Likewise if Ecuador believes that there is no longer a threat to Assange they can revoke it.

There isn’t really such thing as international law. Only treaties between states that are sovereign, and as such can tear them up if they do not wish to abide to them anymore.

International law isn&#x27;t enforcable, really. It would be great if it were, but why would sovereigns give up absolute control of their legal systems?

&quot;UK has no sovereignty!&quot;&quot;UK must resist&quot;&quot;Resist this attempt by the Trump administration&quot;and something else when he&#x27;s in the van which I can&#x27;t make out with people talking over it.

Here&#x27;s a video that shows two guys that were present during his arrest: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;CassandraRules&#x2F;status&#x2F;1115126062961373184" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;CassandraRules&#x2F;status&#x2F;111512606296137318...</a>

&gt;Snowden advising journalists to cover the story with authentic facts&gt;retweets Russia Today and Cassandra FairbanksI can&#x27;t believe people still defend this guy.

&gt; URGENT: Ecuador has illegally terminated Assange political asylum in violation of international law. He was arrested by the British police inside the Ecuadorian embassy minutes ago.Source: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;wikileaks&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116273826621480960" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;wikileaks&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116273826621480960</a>Holy moly, this will be interesting!EDIT:If you&#x27;re interested, here&#x27;s a video of him being escorted out of the embassy --<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;RitaPanahi&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116281098747568128" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;RitaPanahi&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116281098747568128</a>EDIT2:Comments from Snowden advising journalists to cover the story with authentic facts:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;Snowden&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116285397284290560" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;Snowden&#x2F;status&#x2F;1116285397284290560</a>

As soon as he drops the promised Russia documents, I&#x27;m sure!

It did, it&#x27;s a video of an NSA official murdering a congressman at a park then making it look like a drug overdose. I have to say, NSA operatives have really bad haircuts.

But what if the &quot;insurance&quot; files contained some dirt on every organization that might get close enough to Assange to kill him?That way it would make sense for everyone to see to it that the files stay hidden.Like Mutually Assured Destruction.

The entire concept of a dead man&#x27;s switch doesn&#x27;t even make sense when you think about it.Say you have some embarrassing docs about the CIA&#x2F;military and you threaten to release them automatically if you&#x27;re killed. Have you considered that there are plenty of people in the world who would want that to happen? People with lots of money and their own highly trained murderers?Russia, China, Venezuela, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, possibly Mexico or Columbia (considering the shit the CIA&#x27;s pulled there). Hell, I wouldn&#x27;t be surprised if some US government agency, rich dude, or corporation murders you for some weird internal power struggle.Who&#x27;s going to protect you? The CIA&#x2F;military? The very organization that couldn&#x27;t prevent its documents from getting stolen? How can you be certain they haven&#x27;t shifted damage-control planning?The idea of a &quot;dead man&#x27;s switch&quot; plays into the conspiratorial black-and-white view of the world where there&#x27;s a single, unified cabal. Reality is more complex.

I wonder if the WikiLeaks &quot;Dead Man&#x27;s Switch&quot; will be triggered this time?I know there were some news articles in the last couple of years of this being the case...

It was certainly all over social media, plus several major outlets were quite open about not stationing reporters outside the embassy because clearly he was just crying wolf. That&#x27;s probably why this BBC article just has a stock image.

Reload the page for the news of his extradition

breaching bail is not a crime, he either has to be released on the same bail conditions or charged with a crime. However the US have now requested his extradition now that he is in custody.

It&#x27;s not that the police wouldn&#x27;t arrest him if they could. It&#x27;s just that he repeatedly claimed he was getting kicked out of the embassy and it didn&#x27;t happen... until now.

He was wanted by British police for jumping bail, why wouldn&#x27;t they arrest him?

What odds are you willing to bet and for what maximum amount?

It would if he&#x27;s actually extradited to US.

Well, this certainly makes some of us look a bit stupid after criticizing him for crying wolf a few days ago.

Yes.  The whole episode looks very ill-judged.

So basically he&#x27;s been arrested for not complying with UK court orders, right? And the question now is whether the U.S. will seek extradition. Or did they already?

The immediate one is breaking bail conditions.Possibly extradition to the US over Wikileaks stuff, but no pubic application for that yet. But if he could be extradited from the UK to the US over Wikileaks, why would the US do the convoluted &quot;extradite him to Sweden then on to the US from there&quot; scheme that he claims was in progress? (ducks)

It can be re oppened
<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;amp.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;2017&#x2F;may&#x2F;19&#x2F;swedish-prosecutors-drop-julian-assange-investigation" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;amp.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;2017&#x2F;...</a>

I don&#x27;t know if the rape case in Sweden can be reopened. But I suppose the US wants him in relation to the Russian election meddling investigation plus other cases and I suppose for him to be extradited he will first appear before a UK court.There are obviously open cases as he has been arrested.

It wasn&#x27;t dropped, the statute of limitations ran out because JA refused to be interviewed by the prosecutor and hid in an embassy.

And what case would that be? The case in Sweden was dropped for example.

Jumping bail when in the UK is an offence.

They weren&#x27;t fully dropped. The investigation will continue if he enters Sweden before August 2020 when the statute of limitations expires for the last remaining allegation (minor rape).

What case? The sexual assault charge in Sweden was dropped. Or are you talking about the USA wanting their day in court with him?

The offense he is being charged with is absconding on the bail.The maximum punishment for that is complicated, but as far I can see it is either max 3 months or it can be sent to the Crown Court where it is max 2 years.

Finally some reason. Can&#x27;t believe all the comments here supporting Assange. I guess they have drunk the wikileaks cool-aid.

About time. It will be good see his case brought before the courts whatever they will be in the US, UK, Sweden ... staying in the embassy for so many years is just absurd.

What crimes did he commit? Honest question. I heard that someone accused him of being a rapist but then dropped the charges so I guess it was false. What else is there?

I found the Swedish rape case fishy. Are there any facts (going both ways) to speak of at all?

&gt; He may have committed some heinous crimes outside of the actual hacking&#x2F;leakingPretty serious throwaway comment without stating what &quot;heinous crimes&quot; were apparently committed..

I also feel the same way.  He may have committed some heinous crimes outside of the actual hacking&#x2F;leaking but to say we all didn&#x27;t benefit from what we learned regarding how our government spies on us would just be flat out wrong..

&gt; He went from an unsympathetic yet credible figure to one that&#x27;s hard to side with for virtually anyone.The MO is shoot the messenger. As old as the hills.We aren&#x27;t discussing what Wikileaks leaked anymore. We are discussing Julian Assange&#x27;s cats. See how they shifted our attention? That&#x27;s the power of a propaganda - eventually, it will work. They just have to keep at it, and they did.Nobody even disputed what was leaked. Officials confirmed the authenticity and so far, 0% is wrong of the leaks. Yet, we are still discussing how the condom slipped, the smell of the cat, and so on, and so on.No consequences for anyone, almost. We should focus on whether the leaks are legitimate or fabricated and then deal with the perpetrator(s) in a court of law. We should not focus on the person that had the platform to leak them on.It&#x27;s so easy to see that this is orchestrated. This cannot be a coincidence. I can only imagine the kind of pressure Ecuador was under for the last few years. Finally, they conceded. Can&#x27;t blame them - you can&#x27;t go against military superiority of that kind.

Yeah, really interesting to see how there was some sort of slow-motion character assassination over the years.
Put him under pressure, wait for him to lash out, portray him as a raging lunatic and generally bad person. He went from an unsympathetic yet credible figure to one that&#x27;s hard to side with for virtually anyone.It&#x27;s weird that for the most part, all his &quot;crazy talk&quot; has pretty much held up so far. I hope he&#x27;s wrong about the extradition that&#x27;s supposed to follow now, but honestly I doubt it. This is gonna go down in history as one of the more random biographies, and a pretty damning one at that.

The sexual assault case is not dropped. They said they will resume it today.

True, to me he&#x27;s not exactly an attractor of sympathy. It&#x27;s neither clear whether he is guilty regarding the - dropped (!) - sexual assault case or not, but mere speculation. On the other hand one must say he acted quite self-less by publishing information on how governments act in a criminal manner. Intelligence services in particular, if they should have any right to exist they must do so in the most ethical manner as there is zero way for the public to see what&#x27;s going on - them, in an ideal world helping us protect against the most evil parts of society. But if they can&#x27;t manage to be ethical, it&#x27;s cynical that people like Assange get locked away.

I was writing a long post but I deleted it. I don&#x27;t know what to say, I don&#x27;t like the guy, but I have an even stronger dislike for how international politics and intelligence services work.

Maybe they want to get him to the U.S and get his testimony into evidence.  Extradition from the U.K might be difficult after DECLAS.

This was my first thought as well, think there are 2 possibilities:1. The Mueller report presents uncomfortable yet legal, coordination with WikiLeaks, in which case extraditing and prosecuting Assange would allow administration to distance itself and present any coordination as incidental.2. Assange releases were cited in FISA requests. If intelligence agencies had an established assessment on Assange&#x27;s ties to Russia, and requests were authorized with elements contradicting those assessments, it could raise eyebrows. It seems firmly establishing presence or lack of Russian backing, along with sources would bring clarity to several matters.

I wonder if this has to do with the upcoming DECLAS.  Seems that would be coming up soon given what Barr has just testified.

rip. at least he&#x27;s already used to being confined to a small space.. don&#x27;t expect any judge to feel sorry for him. no lawyer will get him out of this one.

I think trying to maintain the &#x27;special relationship&#x27; is their skin in the game.

The state can&#x27;t be seen to wink at skipping bail, or everyone would be doing it. I don&#x27;t think you need to look for any deeper explanation than that.

Which is strange as the UK had little skin in the game to begin with

Apparently (according to other comment), all for the crime of jumping bail, with a maximum sentence of 2 years.

All that just to charge him with skipping bail. It&#x27;s not even a question on whether he will be extradited to the US.

Obviously the tax payer. If there was any payments from foreign interests, they&#x27;re more likely to end up in a Cayman Island bank account than HMRC&#x27;s coffers.

Let&#x27;s just say the UK taxpayer is paying to keep a &quot;special relationship&quot;. Whatever the real value of that is to citizens will remain a mystery.

I wonder if the expense was solely borne by the UK taxpayer or if foreign interests helped finance it.

Meanwhile the reported Brexit will cost 6 billions euros in additional membership fees.

This mean that the single most expensive police case in the history of UK will have an end. It will be interesting to see the final price tag in respect to the final verdict.

&gt; I wonder what Snowden thinksGuess all Snowden posts is curated by KGB.

&gt;You&#x27;d think that after the stupid Russian collusion story was dismantled by the recent Mueller reportNot true at all.
No one except the DoJ and probably white house have seen the Mueller report. They do all they can to prevent people from seeing this supposedly exonerating report.

You mean the Mueller report that hasn&#x27;t been released yet?

The story was hardly dismantled. A number of people have actually pled guilty and been jailed for crimes as a result. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;policy-and-politics&#x2F;2018&#x2F;2&#x2F;20&#x2F;17031772&#x2F;mueller-indictments-grand-jury" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.vox.com&#x2F;policy-and-politics&#x2F;2018&#x2F;2&#x2F;20&#x2F;17031772&#x2F;m...</a>

&gt; after the stupid Russian collusion story was dismantled by the recent Mueller reportHardly anyone has actually read the full 400 page report. And &quot;collusion&quot; has a specific legal meaning which can easily be skirted by a whole raft of plausible deniability methods - Mueller is a stickler; he&#x27;s almost certainly not going to say &quot;collusion&quot; happened unless he has definitive proof that would hold up in court.

Yes, but this twitter convo between WikiLeaks and Donald Trump Jr. is pretty damning. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;DonaldJTrumpJr&#x2F;status&#x2F;930228239494209536" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;DonaldJTrumpJr&#x2F;status&#x2F;930228239494209536</a>

You&#x27;d think that after the stupid Russian collusion story was dismantled by the recent Mueller report, people would be a little more careful with such paranoid allegations, but here we go...

&gt; Has Snowden been actively involved in US politicsUh, the snowden leaks?

Julian Assange used to be hailed as a hero for exposing American hypocrisy, but with the secretive way wikileaks operated and the track record of anti-US releases, perhaps it was only a matter of time before Assange and wikileaks were used as pawns for geopolitics. Still, I&#x27;m curious when did Assange willingly start working for Russia --- was it from the very beginning, or was it after his legal troubles?I wonder what Snowden thinks of the whole situation, as Assange did help him get to Russia. Has Snowden been actively involved in US politics (the way Assange and wikileaks substantially affected the last US presidential election)?

Thanks for the links, man. More info about MH17 fake photo: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bellingcat.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;2014&#x2F;11&#x2F;14&#x2F;russian-state-television-shares-fake-images-of-mh17-being-attacked&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.bellingcat.com&#x2F;news&#x2F;2014&#x2F;11&#x2F;14&#x2F;russian-state-tel...</a>

More proofs.Assange refused to disclose info on Russia&#x27;s aggression in Ukraine - FP<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ukrinform.net&#x2F;rubric-other_news&#x2F;2288391-assange-refused-to-disclose-info-on-russias-aggression-in-ukraine-fp.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.ukrinform.net&#x2F;rubric-other_news&#x2F;2288391-assange-...</a>Wikileaks: A new angle on MH17: Rebels fired at Ukraine fighter jet which was using MH17 as decoy <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.maxkeiser.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;07&#x2F;weeks-ago-they-wanted-to-provoke-the-militia-to-shoot-at-the-passenger-plane-there-would-be-a-global-catastrophe-civilians-would-die&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.maxkeiser.com&#x2F;2014&#x2F;07&#x2F;weeks-ago-they-wanted-to-pr...</a> … and<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;wikileaks&#x2F;status&#x2F;492033939142619136?lang=en" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;wikileaks&#x2F;status&#x2F;492033939142619136?lang...</a>

I think Wikileaks affiliated&#x2F;sponsored from Russia &#x27;cause Assange rejected documents about russian corruption: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;assange-turned-down-documents-related-to-russian-government-corruption-2017-8" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.businessinsider.com&#x2F;assange-turned-down-document...</a>Anyway, &quot;democracy dies in darkness&quot;, so every dirty shit must be highlighted sooner or later.

But on the biggest issue of american politics of the last 50 years, he has found himself (chosen?) on the wrong side of history&lt;edit&gt; 
If you hear trump talk for two minutes and you don&#x27;t immediately realize the danger and what he represents,
you might be too cynical

The majority of people I know don&#x27;t remember or care what Chelsea Manning&#x27;s leaks actually contained. Or that she exists.

Reading the rest of the comments, it&#x27;s surprising that so many people seem to have reduced WikiLeaks &amp; Assange to &#x27;co-conspirators with the President&#x27;. They&#x27;ve been around before the 2016 election.

It applies only to cases where death penalty is possible. Even in those cases extradition is possible after prosecutor agrees not to seek death penalty.

Neither the UK nor Sweden is legally able to extradite to countries where there is a risk of the death penalty being applied.

Brexit has been extended to October and it&#x27;s very likely it won&#x27;t happen at all.Or that UK would be subject to ECJ anyway.

The UK hasn’t left the EU yet and just negotiated the extension to Brexit to October 31 of this year at the latest. I don’t see why Assange wouldn’t be able to appeal now unless his case never gets there before Brexit.

This is not about the ECJ but he could instead appeal to the ECHR, which the UK is still a party to even if there was a Brexit.

If he’s likely to face the death penalty, then he has an excellent legal defence against extradition.If he’d left earlier, he’d have had a chance to appeal to the ECJ too. Ooops

Yes, if he were to be extradited facing the death penalty this would actually violate the European Convention on Human Rights as decided in Soering v UK.

It&#x27;s not quite as clear-cut as that any more: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;uk-news&#x2F;2018&#x2F;jul&#x2F;23&#x2F;uk-will-not-oppose-us-death-penalty-for-isis-beatles" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;uk-news&#x2F;2018&#x2F;jul&#x2F;23&#x2F;uk-will-not-...</a>That&#x27;s an old article (July 2018), but I couldn&#x27;t find anything more recent about that specific aspect of the case.

What about life sentence instead of death penalty?

The UK does not permit extradition where there is a risk of the death penalty being applied. It would require an assurance against the death penalty as a condition of extradition.

Are you referring to Assange&#x27;s connection with the Snowden leak? Why would they seek the death penalty? Even Snowden wouldn&#x27;t get the death penalty were he to return and be prosecuted.

The UK is unlikely to extradite without assurances that the death penalty will not be applied, which is doubtful in any case.

The us is not going to execute him are you mad?

Why on earth would the US govt want to punish him? He helped getting Trump elected and is on friendly terms with Trump Jr.It&#x27;s not like that bunch is known for their loyalty, but even sheer self preservation would suggest that they not meddle with somebody who doubtlessly has ample receipts of their interactions.

He cant be extradited without there being a guarantee that he will not face the death penalty.

He’s more likely to be executed by whichever information sources he has a risk of ratting out in a trial than by the US. Maybe he won’t even make it to US land.

That is highly unlikely due to precedent of the &#x27;60s.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Capital_punishment_by_the_United_States_federal_government#Post-Furman_executions" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Capital_punishment_by_the_Unit...</a>

RIP. It&#x27;s only a matter of time before he&#x27;s extradited, and I would think the current US government would definitely push for the death penalty under the Espionage Act. I suppose it&#x27;s little solace that he&#x27;ll join a long list of illustrious names prosecuted under that infamous act. (Emma Goldman, Eugene Debs, Victor Berger, Chelsea Manning, Edward Snowden)

&gt;The &quot;moral&quot; course of events would be for him to receive a fair trial in the UK or Sweden concerning the rape and possibly the contempt of court charges.Charges (which were ridiculous to begin with) were dropped.&gt;The &quot;immoral&quot; course of evens would be if he was extradited to the US or some other country, receive an unfair trial, or having to defend against other charges.That&#x27;s horrible, but what I expect. Extradition to a country that has the death penalty from a country that doesn&#x27;t shouldn&#x27;t be a thing.

And apparently they selected the immoral option.

The &quot;moral&quot; course of events would be for him to receive a fair trial in the UK or Sweden concerning the rape and possibly the contempt of court charges.The &quot;immoral&quot; course of evens would be if he was extradited to the US or some other country, receive an unfair trial, or having to defend against other charges.

There is a big difference between preventing a single plane from landing at its preferred destination, and attempting to dictate how businesses worldwide must operate.

It was Snowden, and it was a terrible situation. The fact it landed in Vienna is even more ironic.Just another example of the US bullying other countries, and Americans get all pissy with the GDPR.

&gt; I think the Swedish rape allegations have meritI&#x27;m no expert in Swedish law, I trust their legal system, and the legal system in the UK to respond to the demands of the EAW&gt; and unlike Snowden, I don&#x27;t think Assange has broken any US laws for which he can be extradited;If he could, the U.S. could have just as easily extradited him from the UK

If i recall correctly Assange&#x27;s troubles with US started after this leak &quot;Collateral murder&quot; :<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;collateralmurder.wikileaks.org" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;collateralmurder.wikileaks.org</a>

The Swedish rape allegations were an obvious sham and have already been dropped years ago. Usually when this happens the case is just dropped, yet the UK really pressed in arresting Assange for &quot;failing to appear in court&quot;, which is most countries is a minor thing (the accused is not punished for lying in court or missing court dates). I think it&#x27;s obvious that any excuse will do for extraditing him to the US, to make an example of him. But so much time has passed and the case is so public now that I at least hope the UK will save face and free him instead of extraditing him.

&gt; I don&#x27;t think Assange has broken any US laws for which he can be extraditedThere is a sealed indictment of Assange in US district court that was inadvertently leaked when some documents were improperly redacted. [1]There were later reports based on chat logs that Assange solicited or participated in hacking attempts to obtain email documents during the 2016 political campaign.[2]Active solicitation of or participation in illegal hacking is a crime in US law and there is no exception for &#x27;journalists&#x27;.[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;16&#x2F;us&#x2F;politics&#x2F;julian-assange-indictment-wikileaks.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;16&#x2F;us&#x2F;politics&#x2F;julian-assang...</a>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;emma.best&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;15&#x2F;sealed-files-show-assange-and-wikileaks-solicited-hacks-against-governments-politicians-and-corporations&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;emma.best&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;15&#x2F;sealed-files-show-assange-and-w...</a>

Agreed. Its just more proof, (as if we needed it) that the UK is just a little puppet for the US. The police standing outside that embassy were justified on the Swedish extradition request, which has since been withdrawn. All of a sudden now a US extradition request has appeared. We should all take responsibility for this frankly, in my opinion, atrocity this man is a part of our community, the hacker community, this is not only an attack on press freedoms, but the hacker community too.We need to be more vigilent, more aware, stronger and never forget.

Yeah, I remember. A disgrace on several levels. I really wish a European country would have had the spine to give Snowden asylum.Not the same issue as Assange of course, unless, as Assange claims, this too is the long arm of the US secretly trying to get whistleblowers extradited. I&#x27;m not sure that&#x27;s the case here, though; I think the Swedish rape allegations have merit, and unlike Snowden, I don&#x27;t think Assange has broken any US laws for which he can be extradited; he&#x27;s just doing journalist work. Sloppily and with grandstanding megalomania, perhaps, but that&#x27;s not illegal and thus no basis for extradition.

&gt; The governments of half of Europe fold like a cheap suit to the interests of the US intelligence servicesThe governments of most of Western Europe have geopolitical interests strongly allied to the US.&gt; Portuguese, Spanish, French and ItalianSo, all members of SIGINT Seniors Europe except Portugal.

They believed Snowden was on-board, and to make the plane go to Wien, the Portuguese, Spanish, French and Italian governments were pressured to deny Morales right of passage and pressured him to allow the plane to be searched. The governments of half of Europe fold like a cheap suit to the interests of the US intelligence services.

US and UK military power has always dwarfed Ecuador&#x27;s.For seven years, Assange was protected by nothing but paper, so it does seem to have some heft.I guess Assange obnoxiousness is more powerful than a US carrier group. The former finally got it done when the latter couldn&#x27;t.

The bigger guns always win. They can talk about the UN and international law all they want but in the end people notice the gun on your belt, not the paper on the table. It&#x27;s been that way since the dawn of times.They can do that to Bolivia but just try to force Air Force One to land...

He should not have agreed to forced landing and plane search. That was a weak move.

Do you guys remember when the airplane of president Morales, was forced down in Vienna when he was on a flight home? Breaking diplomatic immunity, hospitality etc.Just because CIA believed Assange was in that flight, that Morales would help him escape.EDIT: My mistake, that was for Snowden, <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Evo_Morales_grounding_incident" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;Evo_Morales_grounding_incident</a>

Ken Loach and John Pilger probably didn&#x27;t plan on him skipping bail. I think you can plead, but yea. It&#x27;s probably gone.

Isn&#x27;t the point of bail precisely that you don&#x27;t get the money back if you don&#x27;t show up?

Did the people who stood bail for him get their money back when he went awol?

I agreed. He does not look good.Is he being carried out? Yelling &quot;UK must resist&quot;.

He certainly has some mental health issues, that&#x27;s for sure.

He looked fine just two years ago[1], right before the Ecuadorian presidency changed hands.[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;2017&#x2F;may&#x2F;19&#x2F;julian-assange-signals-he-will-stay-in-ecuadorian-embassy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;2017&#x2F;may&#x2F;19&#x2F;julian-assange...</a>

Being stuck in an embassy for 7 years cannot be healthy.

I agree. There are good reasons why prisons have exercise yards. 7 years in a room is very brutal on a human body.

I think he is in disguise! The difference the beard makes, he used to have stature on the balcony with his hairdo of a year ago, now he physically looks little.Interesting how the UK laid siege to the embassy at vast expense. Had they not done that and just snitched silently with someone watching the normal CCTV that the UK is famous for then they would have had him getting used to nipping outdoors. But no, they made an example of him, and at considerable taxpayer expense.It would only be a matter of time before the government of Ecuador would change to an American rather than a Bolivarian one, so even if they could not coax him out by having the absence of police then he would get himself having &#x27;new landlords&#x27;.Regarding Sweden, women are not &#x27;mere chattel&#x27; in Sweden. To claim that the original allegations were just trumped up US bullshit is nonsense and a failing to understand that Swedish law is serious about equality. I don&#x27;t think that the English speaking nations are anywhere near Sweden when it comes to treating everyone equally in law.The law is a double edged sword, Assange could have understood Swedish law a bit better and respected it. That would have served him better than British law.

The future for westerners that aid chekists never is good.

He looked very ill on the Daily Mail photos, I hope he&#x27;ll survive the next couple of weeks...<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dailymail.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;article-6911187&#x2F;Wikileaks-founder-Julian-Assange-arrested-police.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.dailymail.co.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;article-6911187&#x2F;Wikileaks-f...</a>

&quot;Seeking asylum&quot; is not tbe same as &quot;above the law&quot; as the BBC would have you think.
Lets see if he ends up in the states.

Oh come on. The fact that he has done some good doesn&#x27;t mean that he is above the law.

Nobody would be that stupid to try to arrest him for this.

Of course, he was arrested on completely unrelated bogus charges, so that we never have to have the conversation about whether or not he deserves prison for whistle-blowing.

He wasn&#x27;t arrested for that specific video.

<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;July_12,_2007,_Baghdad_airstrike" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;July_12,_2007,_Baghdad_airstri...</a>&quot;Apache pilots watched people run into a building and engaged that building with several AGM-114 Hellfire missiles.&quot;&quot;controversy following the release of 39 minutes of gunsight footage by leaks website WikiLeaks.&quot;&quot;Press reports of the number killed vary from 12[1][2] to &quot;over 18&quot;.[3][4] 2 journalists were killed, and 2 children were wounded.&quot;The murderers of those 2 journalists and wounding 2 children are free, they had been laughing while killing them.Here we see whom the state hunts for &quot;justice&quot;, Assange, for letting us know above.

More easily. The UK has extradited people to the US on questionable grounds before. I don&#x27;t think Sweden has.

Indeed. More easily because the US&#x2F;UK extradition agreement only requires each country&#x27;s courts to apply the same tests as they use domestically to allow an arrest. In the US that test is called probable cause, in the UK it&#x27;s called reasonable suspicion.(Some people at the time felt that this was not fair as the US test is arguably a tougher one but arguably that just reflects the country&#x27;s domestic arrest policies being different. In any case, the UK refuses far more US extradition requests than vice versa. If you want to read 400 pages on this, the Baker Extradition review which also covers the European Arrest Warrant and the Prima Facie test is available online.)

America could have just as easily extradited him from the UK as from Sweden.

&gt; Scotland Yard has confirmed that Assange was arrested on behalf of the US after receiving a request for his extradition.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;live&#x2F;2019&#x2F;apr&#x2F;11&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arrested-at-the-ecuadorean-embassy-live-updates" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;live&#x2F;2019&#x2F;apr&#x2F;11&#x2F;wikileaks...</a>

They were conspiracy theories when they were first made. This indictment was issued six years after he entered the embassy. If the US had wanted to extradite him at the time, they could&#x27;ve tried at any point in the two years that he was in the UK before skipping bail.

&gt; It will be interesting to see if the US tries to extradite him.Don&#x27;t worry no such thing exists, it&#x27;s all conspiracy theories as they said for years...

Australia is part of 5 eyes. Very unlikely they will do anything.

&#x27;Straya would prosecute and send him to jail immediately. They are even more 1984 than USA.

Australia just released a statement that they will continue to offer general consul services, and that&#x27;s it.Too little too late there, Australia.

He is a dual national now, which only complicates any attempt, Australia&#x27;s connection with Five-eyes and other military and political arrangements aside.

Australia is run by a bunch of corrupt neoliberal oligarchs burning the place to the ground on the way out the doorThey have &quot;better&quot; things to do than worry about some &quot;peasant&quot;. Like their six figure pensions and lobbying deals

Wikileaks has leaked 10 some-odd documents on Australia, so I don&#x27;t expect them to go to bat for him.The problem with being a uniform thorn in everybody&#x27;s side is you run out of friends.

Pretty sure he is from Austria not Australia which is only close in the dictionary.

I wish Australia would step up and actually defend one of their citizens.

I&#x27;m not an expert, is this (93%) by conviction or plea deal? One would assume he doesn&#x27;t plea guilty.

&gt; There is a sealed indictment against him in EDVA which was accidentally released.Details here:<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;national-security&#x2F;julian-assange-has-been-charged-prosecutors-reveal-in-inadvertent-court-filing&#x2F;2018&#x2F;11&#x2F;15&#x2F;9902e6ba-98bd-48df-b447-3e2a4638f05a_story.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.washingtonpost.com&#x2F;world&#x2F;national-security&#x2F;julia...</a>

Grand Juries have a very high indict rate, especially federal ones, but there’s arguments about why that is.One argument is obviously that grand juries are pushovers and indeed would literally indict a ham sandwich.The other argument, hinted above, is that prosecutors only move to indict if they think they have a chance to win at trial. Since the evidentiary standards are much higher for conviction, that means they easily clear the requirements for the grand jury indictment the vast majority of the time.

&gt; There is a sealed indictment against him in EDVA which was accidentally released.No, there was an inadvertent mention in a filing made in another case which strongly suggests that there is an indictment in EDVA, which would have to be sealed because no unsealed indictment exists. The indictment itself was not released.

Unsealed: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charg...</a>

There is a sealed indictment against him in EDVA which was accidentally released. He has been most certainly accused of breaking United States laws.Edit: To indict someone, the government has to show the grand jury that there is sufficient evidence. It is very easy to indict someone (hence the phrase “A ham sandwich can be indicted by the grand jury”) but one has to acknowledge the fact that the federal government has very high win rate for the cases that do go to trial (93% in 2012)Edit2: The above statistic is for the cases that go to trial and plea deals. Only 3% of the cases go to trial.

If we&#x27;re talking coincidences, I can&#x27;t get over how this is happening right in the middle of Brexit, and immediately after the successful Cooper-Letwin bill to stave it off further.Obviously Ecuador has no stake in Brexit directly, but of interest is the Farage connection: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;2018&#x2F;jan&#x2F;19&#x2F;trump-russia-inquiry-is-told-nigel-farage-may-have-given-julian-assange-data" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;politics&#x2F;2018&#x2F;jan&#x2F;19&#x2F;trump-russi...</a>

2) is interesting because going down this path would involve investigating the motivation behind WikiLeaks communicating with the GRU and what WikiLeaks intended to do with the information they obtained once they did so (just a one-shot dump of everything versus strategically-times leaks). The timing of Assange’s arrest occurring a few weeks after the conclusion of the Mueller investigation seems opportune albeit coincidental. A more sinister and cynical interpretation of this timing would be an attempt to wrap up any perceived loose ends.Edited a few times after proofreading.

&gt; Daniel Ellsberg of the &quot;Pentagon Papers&quot; fame has made it extremely difficult if not downright impossible for the government to win in such cases.The Ellsberg case was resolved though when the case mistrialed because of prosecutorial misconduct so egregious it prevented the defendants from ever being able to have a fair trial. It was not resolved with any finding that any of the underlying charges were without merit, and therefore did not establish any legal precedent.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.nytimes.com&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;learning&#x2F;general&#x2F;onthisday&#x2F;big&#x2F;0511.html#article" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;archive.nytimes.com&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;learning&#x2F;general...</a>

&gt; Why would a government so keen on accusing people of espionage and no doubt wanting to set a precedent for various things being classified as espionage (such as leaks), settle so easily?Because you&#x27;ve misunderstood the motive: it&#x27;s not about setting precedent, it&#x27;s about securing convictions for the people charged. Which plea bargain guilty pleas do.&gt; Daniel Ellsberg of the &quot;Pentagon Papers&quot; fame has made it extremely difficult if not downright impossible for the government to win in such cases.For cases like the Ellsberg case , sure, but that&#x27;s because of the gross prosecutorial misconduct in that case, not the substance of the charges.

I think every single one of US government&#x27;s &quot;espionage&quot; charges over the past several decades ended in settlements.Why would a government so keen on accusing people of espionage and no doubt wanting to set a precedent for various things being classified as espionage (such as leaks), settle so easily?Well, because the charges have always been bogus and they know it. Daniel Ellsberg of the &quot;Pentagon Papers&quot; fame has made it extremely difficult if not downright impossible for the government to win in such cases.If the US government will succeed in sentencing Assange, it won&#x27;t be due to a espionage charge, but something else entirely, or at best, yet another plea bargain.

&gt; I think the criminal argument is that he was acting as a cutout for Russian intelligence with the dnc leaks.That may be a (relatively new) criminal argument, but there is also Manning plus 18 USC §2(a): “Whoever commits an offense against the United States or aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures its commission, is punishable as a principal.” (emphasis added)Plus probably all kinds of stuff in between.

There is no evidence that there are any charges related to Russia. In theory it is long standing legal theory that publishing &quot;stolen&quot; docs is legal. Now I suspect in people&#x27;s hatred for Assange they will overlook the fact that if this new legal theory is allowed to stand that the first amendment is effectively destroyed. The government will be able to label something secret and getting access to the secret is now a crime. Free to publish but not free to receive information. Catch 22.

I think the criminal argument is that he was acting as a cutout for Russian intelligence with the dnc leaks.

That was quick<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=19633234" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.ycombinator.com&#x2F;item?id=19633234</a>Julian Assange, 47, (03.07.71) has today, Thursday 11 April, been further arrested on behalf of the United States authorities, at 10:53hrs after his arrival at a central London police station. This is an extradition warrant under Section 73 of the Extradition Act. He will appear in custody at Westminster Magistrates&#x27; Court as soon as possible.

&gt; It will be interesting to see if the US tries to extradite him. It&#x27;s actually not 100% clear that he&#x27;s broken any US laws in any ways that they aren&#x27;t also routinely broken by newspapers.He has also been arrested on the extradition warrant to the US:<a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.met.police.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;update-arrest-of-julian-assange-365565" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.met.police.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;update-arrest-of-julian-assan...</a>

For those who prefer the original source: <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.met.police.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;update-arrest-of-julian-assange-365565" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.met.police.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;update-arrest-of-julian-assan...</a>

&quot;5 years.&quot;Isn&#x27;t he facing 10 years in UK for fleeing on bail?Does US extradite him, trial him, (jail him?) and then ship him off to the UK to serve his time there?

This is why &quot;breaking&quot; news confuses as much as it informs.Has he been arrested for skipping bail on a UK court warrant? Yes.Has he been arrested on a US indictment for extradition? Also yes.These are two separate arrests. It just happens that one was once he was already at a police station. <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.met.police.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;update-arrest-of-julian-assange-365565" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;news.met.police.uk&#x2F;news&#x2F;update-arrest-of-julian-assan...</a>Edit: apparently the Swedish extradition is spinning up as well.

&gt; Eastern District of VirginiaAs expected

&gt;It will be interesting to see if the US tries to extradite him.Scotland Yard has confirmed that Assange was arrested on behalf of the US after receiving a request for his extradition.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;live&#x2F;2019&#x2F;apr&#x2F;11&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-julian-assange-arrested-at-the-ecuadorean-embassy-live-updates" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.theguardian.com&#x2F;media&#x2F;live&#x2F;2019&#x2F;apr&#x2F;11&#x2F;wikileaks...</a>Edit: Indictment: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charg...</a>

looks like they are trying to charge him with computer related offences.

He is being charged with &quot;conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified U.S. government computer&quot;, not anything to do with publishing classified information. <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charg...</a>

Regarding #1, there is no law in the US criminal code against publishing classified information. It&#x27;s certainly illegal for a journalist to actively steal classified information, or conspire with others to do so, but just publishing is fine.Under some circumstances a journalist can be forced to appear in court and reveal his sources. And if he refuses to answer he can be held in contempt.

&gt; The Home Office has confirmed the US request for Assange’s extradition is for an alleged “computer-related offence”. (guardian)Update&gt;The US justice department has confirmed that it issued an extradition request for Assange “in connection with a federal charge of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion for agreeing to break a password to a classified US government computer”.

once he sets foot in US soil he&#x27;s screwed regardless of the laws specifics, just watch.

The accusation is that he aided Manning in breaking in to classified computers: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charged-computer-hacking-conspiracy" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;pr&#x2F;wikileaks-founder-charg...</a>

Whenever the government Al Capones someone, which ought to be a verb, it&#x27;s a reminder to me that due to a legislative and prosecutorial discretion excesses combined with politics that those of us who aren&#x27;t 100% squeaky clean are unjustly vulnerable to judicial creativity run amuck. If you&#x27;ve got a Snowden or an Assange you want to lock up with all keys thrown away, stick to charges along the lines of espionage etc; and if you cannot prove those charges, too bad - don&#x27;t attempt to railroad them for paying a nanny under the table. Not that there&#x27;s anything forgiveable about nanny tax evasion, but I&#x27;m bothered by byproducts of affording too much discretion in the judicial system.

“Assange is charged with conspiracy to commit computer intrusion and is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. If convicted, he faces a maximum penalty of five years in prison. Actual sentences for federal crimes are typically less than the maximum penalties. A federal district court judge will determine any sentence after taking into account the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and other statutory factors.”

It looks like the US is charging him with conspiracy to hack a government computer.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;04&#x2F;11&#x2F;world&#x2F;europe&#x2F;julian-assange-wikileaks-ecuador-embassy.amp.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.google.com&#x2F;amp&#x2F;s&#x2F;www.nytimes.com&#x2F;2019&#x2F;04&#x2F;11&#x2F;worl...</a>

Obama commuted the sentence. Pardon would have wiped the charges. Commuting just shortened the penalty.

Even had Manning been pardoned it would have no bearing whatsoever.

the real question is, will his sentence be less, equal, or more?

Looks like the indictment is conspiracy with Manning. Manning was pardoned[1] by the Obama admin. Does that have any bearing on Assange’s case?[1] I’ve been corrected; her sentence was commuted.

It&#x27;s very unlikely that the facts resemble anything like that. What&#x27;s your friends name? I&#x27;ll happily pay the Pacer fees to see what the charging document says.

I had a friend once who did 18 months Federal time for just saying he could get 100 tabs of LSD at a forest rave in central Florida.Not having it...not getting any...not even showing the undercover agent even one damn tab.His charge ended up being &quot;Conspiracy Against the United States&quot; or something along those lines.So I am pretty sure the US government will come up with some rather bogus charge against Assange, considering how he humiliated it.

It really isn’t when you look at what he’s being charged with.

&gt; Publishing classified information. Easy to show that he did this but a very difficult path to go down when American newspapers do this all the time.A difficult path, maybe, but also an avenue for setting precedent to go after the press.

They are in possession of some very specific irrefutable evidence, that&#x27;s what it&#x27;s about.

It&#x27;s not directly about leaking or espionage though. The indictment [1] says that he conspired to help crack passwords from classified government databases.[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;press-release&#x2F;file&#x2F;1153481&#x2F;download" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.justice.gov&#x2F;usao-edva&#x2F;press-release&#x2F;file&#x2F;1153481...</a>

Was 7 years self-imprisonment in an embassy worth it? I&#x27;d like to know how.

It&#x27;s a &quot;done deal&quot;, he WILL be extradited.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.exaronews.com&#x2F;julian-assange-to-be-extradited-wikileaks-founder-facing-five-years-in-u-s-jail" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.exaronews.com&#x2F;julian-assange-to-be-extradited-wi...</a>

Breaking into government computers is a crime.

It sounds like the US will for sure extradite him.

I’m no international law expert, but wouldn’t the UK demand that the US disclose in advance everything they plan to charge him with?Otherwise, couldn’t he argue in the UK that his rights might be violated by the extradition, in the event that the US charges him with something that isn’t considered a crime in the UK?

Actually, no, US newspapers don&#x27;t STEAL information, which is what he&#x27;s being charged with. If you get it from another source and you weren&#x27;t part of acquiring it, you cannot be legally responsible for it (it&#x27;s not like receiving stolen property). But the governments case is that in statements to manning is that he was active in ACQUIRING the information. Therefore he can be held criminally liable. Now whether those statements are really enough to hold up in court are a huge issue, but it won&#x27;t matter because one they get him here they can add on a ton of charges -- perjury, conspiracy, and whatever national security rules they  want. But your point #1 is not valid in that if US newspapers did ever steal information they could be held criminally liable (they don&#x27;t).

It will be interesting to see if the US tries to extradite him. It&#x27;s actually not 100% clear that he&#x27;s broken any US laws in any ways that they aren&#x27;t also routinely broken by newspapers.There&#x27;s a few avenues:
1) Publishing classified information. Easy to show that he did this but a very difficult path to go down when American newspapers do this all the time.2) Conspiracy to commit espionage. Probably the most likely, this would require showing that he was actively working with someone to extract classified information. Just openly soliciting leaks to an email address wouldn&#x27;t be enough, he&#x27;d really have to be talking to a leaker before&#x2F;during the extraction of the data. Depending on the nature of his communications with Guccifer (The GRU hackers from 2016) they may be able to make a case on this basis.3) Al Capone style &#x2F; collateral attack. The US made it very hard for Wikileaks to operate financially. Maybe he did something that falls under the US&#x27; capacious money laundering rules?Note that this case is fundamentally different from Manning &#x2F; Snowden &#x2F; Winner who all had access to classified information legally and misused that access. Due to the first amendment, American espionage laws are quite narrowly written compared to those of many other countries and while it is easy to prosecute people on the &quot;inside&quot; for leaking classified material to the &quot;outside&quot;, it is much harder to prosecute someone for what they do with it when it&#x27;s out.(Edit: Well that was fast! Interested to see what&#x27;s in the indictment)

Few if anyone on Sweden care about this. It&#x27;s a normal rape case albeit with a celebrity in it. It should go through the normal process. Hardly something Putin would discuss with Löfven.

Assange was arrested just 1 day after Russian president Putin met with Swedish PM Löfven.<a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thelocal.se&#x2F;20190410&#x2F;heres-what-stefan-lfven-and-vladimir-putin-talked-about-in-their-first-one-on-one-meeting" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;www.thelocal.se&#x2F;20190410&#x2F;heres-what-stefan-lfven-and...</a>

Julian Assange arrested in London