3 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Juries decide guilt.

 

‘They’, whoever ‘they’ are do not get to tell juries to convict,

Oh please! Do you seriously think that the American government isn't capable of getting what they want in a trial like this??? 

41 minutes ago, pacovl46 said:

They WILL statue an example! They consider his crime to be high treason and he's gonna get some lengthy time.

He’ll only get a sentence if the Jury find him guilty.

 

 

I think the Republicans will be very worried by the prospect of Assange at trial.

 

LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump offered to pardon WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange if he said that Russia had nothing to do with WikiLeaks’ publication of Democratic Party emails in 2016,

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-assange-idUSKBN20D2A2

If he had handed himself over immediately instead of all that time wasted hiding he may have already done his time and be out by now if guilty.  Bad move for Julian now has to start all over again 

10 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

I think the Republicans will be very worried by the prospect of Assange at trial.

 

LONDON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump offered to pardon WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange if he said that Russia had nothing to do with WikiLeaks’ publication of Democratic Party emails in 2016,

 

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-britain-assange-idUSKBN20D2A2

Not just Republicans, but Farage too.

 

If Assange was smart enough to know what’s in his best interest, and there is scant evidence he is, he would be negotiating a plea deal.

 

He was directly involved in Russia’s interference in the 2016 election, he has information to trade.

 

He needs do take the best option he has available and cut a plea deal.

 

14 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

He’ll only get a sentence if the Jury find him guilty.

 

 

They will! I'd be very surprised otherwise.

For a little different perspective, I view JA as someone who helped DT in the 2016 election, and I suspect those same people see him as a potential asset should he be sent to the US.  I am against him being extradited because I don't like the team he'll possibly be working for, and I hold it against him that he was complicit in what happened in the 2016 election.  He could have lived out his years turning the Ecuadorian embassy into a fungus farm as far as I'm concerned.

Snowden is a different story: there is at least one US National Security Advisor who will flay him alive, given the chance; he'd best not return while she is alive, and I would think he knows it. 

 

 

A post with a trolling representation of a politician's name has been removed along with replies.  

 

It seems that no one wants this low-life.  Sweden doesn't seem to want him, the Ecuadorian Embassy got tired of him in short order and now the UK is more than willing to send to the US.