10 ms·

In an ideal world we would get to do a reverse investigation to understand which government officials were complicit in his very obviously politically motivated

In an ideal world we would get to do a reverse investigation to understand which government officials were complicit in his very obviously politically motivated detention, action would be taken upon those individuals to ensure accountability, and the system itself would be updated so powerful interests can't abuse the law like this. How far are we from this world?

dboreham 2y ago
Responsibility has to be pretty defuse, right? You can at least begin with all the presidents in office since he was prosecuted, until N-1 since presumably the Nth just released him.
- sackfield 2y ago
  Diffusion of responsibility is definitely a defense in these cases, but the system should recognize this shortcoming and assign accountability (at least in an ideal world). Although I'm willing to bet that the true actors here weren't necessarily presidents (even though they would ultimately be accountable like you say). Would be interesting to see who demanded what and when.
  - ambicapter 2y ago
    Diffusion of responsibility comes from diffusion of power, which is an intended goal of many stable systems of government. Cuts both ways.
  - akira2501 2y ago
    It's not to lionize Assange, but these are almost crimes against humanity, they stole peoples tax dollars and then built a surveillance state used against the citizens. When that was revealed they then used the same tools to destroy a single human being for the purposes of creating a decade long chilling effect for anyone who might consider doing the same. There shouldn't be any diffuse responsibility for participating in this farce at any level. When the information was released the public never clamored for it to be investigated and for people to be hunted down and jailed for releasing it. It was entirely a captured administrative state claiming for itself rights it demonstrably never had, such as claiming a foreign national committed treason, or that he could be viewed as an "enemy combatant." To have gone along with this willingly deserves the same scrutiny we gave German officers at the end of WWII.
    - loup-vaillant 2y ago
      > There shouldn't be any diffuse responsibility for participating in this farce at any level. I would argue there should, no exception. Not even WWII. While keeping in mind that the responsibility was so gigantic to begin with, that even diffusing it might end up putting most participants in jail, some of them for a long time.
- etchalon 2y ago
  A lot of Assange supporters are going to feel weird about giving Biden credit for his release, especially since Biden was part of the administration that initially decided to pursue Assange.
  - TallTales 2y ago
    Also because he was forced into pleading guilty for doing journalism. A great crime has been committed against Assange and I understand why he would do this. I would never ask him to spend another day in a small Ecuadorian embassy room with no living facilities or in a medieval torture cell in England... He has suffered more for the free people of the world than we have a right to ask for but this is not a just outcome.
    - dools 2y ago
      He wasn't "doing journalism". WikiLeaks just posted a completely unevaluated firehose of data fed to it by whomever, which is why they were such an easy asset for Russian intelligence.
      - rendall 2y ago
        This is misinformation. Their policy was never to publish anything they could not verify, and the "asset for Russian intelligence" was only ever a DNC and US intelligence smear to discredit Wikileaks.
        af78 2y ago
        It's not just "DNC and US intelligence." Wikileaks tried to influence the 2017 election in France among other examples. See https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacronLeaks https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacronLeaks. This partially backfired when the dump of e-mails they published was found to contain russian-language messages. That Wikileaks systematically favors the russian government, and never does anything contrary to the interests of the russian government, strongly suggests they are an asset of russia.
wmf 2y ago
There has been reporting on this. Apparently there was one zealous person in DOJ pushing the Assange case and everybody else thinks it's too weak to be worth it.
- tyingq 2y ago
  This article from the Intercept covers it pretty well. The prosecutor in question is Gordon Kromberg. https://archive.is/E5KbI https://archive.is/E5KbI Here's another: https://www.newagebd.net/article/226187/julian-assanges-grand-inquisitor https://www.newagebd.net/article/226187/julian-assanges-gran...
- doctorpangloss 2y ago
  It's interesting, if you believe that one person can take down the system - as a whistleblower must - well surely, one person can buck the system's instincts and try to take down you.
- alfiedotwtf 2y ago
  Don’t forget Hillary was fixated on Assange for a long time, and was even quoted with “Can’t we just drone the guy?”. The direct spat lead to Assange helping Trump and the Russians publish Hillary’s email server spool. I don’t like that Assange ended up helping Trump and Russia, but you can’t blame him for helping the one person who can kick the person out of office who wants to Tomahawk you
  - CalChris 2y ago
    Unproven. At best unproven and denied. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/julian-assange-drone-strike/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/julian-assange-drone-strik...
    - nullc 2y ago
      Your link does not include a denial, it includes Clinton saying she did not recall making such a comment. Is there an outright denial elsewhere?
dumdumdumdum 2y ago
[flagged]
- dang 2y ago
  Since your comments have become repeatedly flamebaity and unsubstantive, and now appear to consist mostly of "LMAO", we've banned the account. HN is for something else. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.
29athrowaway 2y ago
There is a big overlap between political organizations and organized crime.
xkcd-sucks 2y ago
I was reminded of this joke: > A city slicker shoots a duck out in the country. As he's retrieving it, a farmer walks up and stops him, claiming that since the duck is on his farm, it technically belongs to him. After minutes of arguing, the farmer proposes they settle the matter "country style." > "What's country style?" asks the city boy. > "Out here in the country," the farmer says: "when two fellers have a dispute, one feller kicks the other one in the balls as hard as he can. Then that feller, why, he kicks the first one as hard as he can. And so forth. Last man standin' wins the dispute." > Warily the city boy agrees and prepares himself. The farmer hauls off and kicks him in the groin with all his might. The city boy falls to the ground in the most intense pain he's ever felt, crying like a baby and rolling around on the ground. Finally he staggers to his feet and says: "All right, n-now it's–it's m-my turn." > The farmer grins: "Forget it, you win. Keep the duck."
- Buttons840 2y ago
  The real life version is a company sues you for a stupid reason and after spending a couple hundred thousand dollars on your defense the company loses and says "our bad lol", and then the matter is settled. Or, in this case, after prosecutors hold someone in prison for a decade or two they offer a plea deal.
  - acer4666 2y ago
    That's not what's happened here. His time in UK prison counts towards his US charges and is the reason he's not doing time in US prison. It's more like if "settling things country style" involved giving each other ducks, and after round one the farmer received a duck then said "forget it keep your duck".
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
- paulddraper 2y ago
  That's like playing "who can punch the softest" with my dad
hdbv6 2y ago
[flagged]
ajross 2y ago
> action would be taken upon those individuals to ensure accountability Out of genuine curiosity: what "actions" do you want taken and what accountability are you interested in? I mean, to be blunt: you think this is a crime, right? You want someone charged and prosecuted in a court, with due process, in front of a jury of peers, yada yada. So... what if your imaginary prosecutor jumps ship to somewhere else where they get arrested and detained, and then refuse to come back to the US to face trial. Are they not then a political prisoner? Why not? The point being: Assange wasn't thrown in jail without trial, he was thrown in jail because he refused trial. And there's an important difference.
jesterson 2y ago
Oh boy, very far, unfortunately. What you say we need badly as it keeps every government employee accountable for what they did.
tophi 2y ago
Cheers. what say you to Navalny’s torture, detainment, and death?
- pastage 2y ago
  Corrupting legal processes with a combination of weasel talk and bureaucracy is always the first step towards a Navalnyj situation. When that happens to political dissidents how ever bad they are we should all feel great concern. But I might missunderstand you.
  - tophi 2y ago
    1. I agree with you. 2. Assange is a Russian asset and the West’s (esp USAs) emphasis on freedom of speech puts us in a very difficult situation with respect to information dissemination. 3. This blind spot is being heavily leveraged to alarming success and Authoritarian regimes are gaining momentum with their goals. Mainly To destabilize democracies and make us all like them. We also want them to fail and be reborn as democracies. 4. I do not know how to navigate this challenge in an ethical/moral way. But i want to make sure we all recognize the biggest genuine threat to our descendants’ freedoms.
- sackfield 2y ago
  I don't know a lot about it, on the face of it I think its terrible. Why do you ask?
- hajile 2y ago
  Most reasonable people would denounce BOTH. You seem to be pushing toward the idea that "if they do something evil, my evil is no longer evil".
  - tophi 2y ago
    No, absolutely not. The West must be held to a higher standard and we have a duty to hold ourselves there, but too many are failing to understand the biggest threat to all the world’s freedom. Hint hint, it is the actual authoritarians.

dboreham 2y ago

Responsibility has to be pretty defuse, right? You can at least begin with all the presidents in office since he was prosecuted, until N-1 since presumably the Nth just released him.

sackfield 2y ago
Diffusion of responsibility is definitely a defense in these cases, but the system should recognize this shortcoming and assign accountability (at least in an ideal world). Although I'm willing to bet that the true actors here weren't necessarily presidents (even though they would ultimately be accountable like you say). Would be interesting to see who demanded what and when.
- ambicapter 2y ago
  Diffusion of responsibility comes from diffusion of power, which is an intended goal of many stable systems of government. Cuts both ways.
- akira2501 2y ago
  It's not to lionize Assange, but these are almost crimes against humanity, they stole peoples tax dollars and then built a surveillance state used against the citizens. When that was revealed they then used the same tools to destroy a single human being for the purposes of creating a decade long chilling effect for anyone who might consider doing the same. There shouldn't be any diffuse responsibility for participating in this farce at any level. When the information was released the public never clamored for it to be investigated and for people to be hunted down and jailed for releasing it. It was entirely a captured administrative state claiming for itself rights it demonstrably never had, such as claiming a foreign national committed treason, or that he could be viewed as an "enemy combatant." To have gone along with this willingly deserves the same scrutiny we gave German officers at the end of WWII.
  - loup-vaillant 2y ago
    > There shouldn't be any diffuse responsibility for participating in this farce at any level. I would argue there should, no exception. Not even WWII. While keeping in mind that the responsibility was so gigantic to begin with, that even diffusing it might end up putting most participants in jail, some of them for a long time.
etchalon 2y ago
A lot of Assange supporters are going to feel weird about giving Biden credit for his release, especially since Biden was part of the administration that initially decided to pursue Assange.
- TallTales 2y ago
  Also because he was forced into pleading guilty for doing journalism. A great crime has been committed against Assange and I understand why he would do this. I would never ask him to spend another day in a small Ecuadorian embassy room with no living facilities or in a medieval torture cell in England... He has suffered more for the free people of the world than we have a right to ask for but this is not a just outcome.
  - dools 2y ago
    He wasn't "doing journalism". WikiLeaks just posted a completely unevaluated firehose of data fed to it by whomever, which is why they were such an easy asset for Russian intelligence.
    - rendall 2y ago
      This is misinformation. Their policy was never to publish anything they could not verify, and the "asset for Russian intelligence" was only ever a DNC and US intelligence smear to discredit Wikileaks.
      - af78 2y ago
        It's not just "DNC and US intelligence." Wikileaks tried to influence the 2017 election in France among other examples. See https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacronLeaks https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/MacronLeaks. This partially backfired when the dump of e-mails they published was found to contain russian-language messages. That Wikileaks systematically favors the russian government, and never does anything contrary to the interests of the russian government, strongly suggests they are an asset of russia.

wmf 2y ago

There has been reporting on this. Apparently there was one zealous person in DOJ pushing the Assange case and everybody else thinks it's too weak to be worth it.

tyingq 2y ago
This article from the Intercept covers it pretty well. The prosecutor in question is Gordon Kromberg. https://archive.is/E5KbI https://archive.is/E5KbI Here's another: https://www.newagebd.net/article/226187/julian-assanges-grand-inquisitor https://www.newagebd.net/article/226187/julian-assanges-gran...
doctorpangloss 2y ago
It's interesting, if you believe that one person can take down the system - as a whistleblower must - well surely, one person can buck the system's instincts and try to take down you.
alfiedotwtf 2y ago
Don’t forget Hillary was fixated on Assange for a long time, and was even quoted with “Can’t we just drone the guy?”. The direct spat lead to Assange helping Trump and the Russians publish Hillary’s email server spool. I don’t like that Assange ended up helping Trump and Russia, but you can’t blame him for helping the one person who can kick the person out of office who wants to Tomahawk you
- CalChris 2y ago
  Unproven. At best unproven and denied. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/julian-assange-drone-strike/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/julian-assange-drone-strik...
  - nullc 2y ago
    Your link does not include a denial, it includes Clinton saying she did not recall making such a comment. Is there an outright denial elsewhere?

dumdumdumdum 2y ago

[flagged]

dang 2y ago
Since your comments have become repeatedly flamebaity and unsubstantive, and now appear to consist mostly of "LMAO", we've banned the account. HN is for something else. If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email hn@ycombinator.com and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. They're here: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html.

29athrowaway 2y ago

There is a big overlap between political organizations and organized crime.

xkcd-sucks 2y ago

I was reminded of this joke: > A city slicker shoots a duck out in the country. As he's retrieving it, a farmer walks up and stops him, claiming that since the duck is on his farm, it technically belongs to him. After minutes of arguing, the farmer proposes they settle the matter "country style." > "What's country style?" asks the city boy. > "Out here in the country," the farmer says: "when two fellers have a dispute, one feller kicks the other one in the balls as hard as he can. Then that feller, why, he kicks the first one as hard as he can. And so forth. Last man standin' wins the dispute." > Warily the city boy agrees and prepares himself. The farmer hauls off and kicks him in the groin with all his might. The city boy falls to the ground in the most intense pain he's ever felt, crying like a baby and rolling around on the ground. Finally he staggers to his feet and says: "All right, n-now it's–it's m-my turn." > The farmer grins: "Forget it, you win. Keep the duck."

Buttons840 2y ago
The real life version is a company sues you for a stupid reason and after spending a couple hundred thousand dollars on your defense the company loses and says "our bad lol", and then the matter is settled. Or, in this case, after prosecutors hold someone in prison for a decade or two they offer a plea deal.
- acer4666 2y ago
  That's not what's happened here. His time in UK prison counts towards his US charges and is the reason he's not doing time in US prison. It's more like if "settling things country style" involved giving each other ducks, and after round one the farmer received a duck then said "forget it keep your duck".
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
paulddraper 2y ago
That's like playing "who can punch the softest" with my dad

hdbv6 2y ago

[flagged]

ajross 2y ago

> action would be taken upon those individuals to ensure accountability Out of genuine curiosity: what "actions" do you want taken and what accountability are you interested in? I mean, to be blunt: you think this is a crime, right? You want someone charged and prosecuted in a court, with due process, in front of a jury of peers, yada yada. So... what if your imaginary prosecutor jumps ship to somewhere else where they get arrested and detained, and then refuse to come back to the US to face trial. Are they not then a political prisoner? Why not? The point being: Assange wasn't thrown in jail without trial, he was thrown in jail because he refused trial. And there's an important difference.

jesterson 2y ago

Oh boy, very far, unfortunately. What you say we need badly as it keeps every government employee accountable for what they did.

tophi 2y ago

Cheers. what say you to Navalny’s torture, detainment, and death?

pastage 2y ago
Corrupting legal processes with a combination of weasel talk and bureaucracy is always the first step towards a Navalnyj situation. When that happens to political dissidents how ever bad they are we should all feel great concern. But I might missunderstand you.
- tophi 2y ago
  1. I agree with you. 2. Assange is a Russian asset and the West’s (esp USAs) emphasis on freedom of speech puts us in a very difficult situation with respect to information dissemination. 3. This blind spot is being heavily leveraged to alarming success and Authoritarian regimes are gaining momentum with their goals. Mainly To destabilize democracies and make us all like them. We also want them to fail and be reborn as democracies. 4. I do not know how to navigate this challenge in an ethical/moral way. But i want to make sure we all recognize the biggest genuine threat to our descendants’ freedoms.
sackfield 2y ago
I don't know a lot about it, on the face of it I think its terrible. Why do you ask?
hajile 2y ago
Most reasonable people would denounce BOTH. You seem to be pushing toward the idea that "if they do something evil, my evil is no longer evil".
- tophi 2y ago
  No, absolutely not. The West must be held to a higher standard and we have a duty to hold ourselves there, but too many are failing to understand the biggest threat to all the world’s freedom. Hint hint, it is the actual authoritarians.