Stella Assange speaking to the Luxembourg Parliament on the persecution of Julian Assange

  • Peaty
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    How could a secretary of state be involved in prosecution? That’s completely outside their job description and it isn’t as if that’s a job with a lot of free time.

    • wildbus8979
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You somehow think that the release of the State Department cables have nothing to do with the secret indictment?

      • Peaty
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        There is no secret indictment. We know exactly what the allegations are because that information is public.

        Regardless of that the Secretary of State is not providing direct input into the prosecution of an individual.

        In Assange’s specific case he was charged during Trump’s presidency so Hilary could not at any point have been involved in his prosecution.

        You are confused and you likely read shitty sources.

        • TWeaK@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          The indictment was not secret, but the evidence to back up their accusations was and still is.

        • wildbus8979
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          That’s extremely disengenious, the indictment was secret for years.

          Regardless of that the Secretary of State is not providing direct input into the prosecution of an individual.

          Lol

          In Assange’s specific case he was charged during Trump’s presidency so Hilary could not at any point have been involved in his prosecution.

          Buddy. You’ve got to be kidding.

          In 2012 and 2013, US officials indicated that Assange was not named in a sealed indictment. […] In November 2018, US prosecutors accidentally revealed that Assange had been indicted under seal in US federal court;

          https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/16/us/politics/julian-assange-indictment-wikileaks.html

          https://www.chronicle.com/article/how-a-george-washington-u-researcher-stumbled-across-a-huge-government-secret/

          • Peaty
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No it wasn’t secret. Once it is filed it is public.

            In 2018 Clinton was not in office. She wasn’t involved in his prosecution, which wasn’t going on until Trump took office, and you don’t seem to have anything that proves she was.

            • wildbus8979
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              That is not how FISA courts work. God damnit, the DOJ admired it themselves and you still won’t believe. Can you spell cognitive dissonance and blind faith?

              What Means Justice? The Acceptance of Secret Indictments inthe United States and in International Lawthe United States and in International Law (2001)

              THE INTEGRAL AND LONG-STANDING USE OF SECRET INDICTMENTS IN UNITED STATES LAW

              Regardless of the results that the practice of secretly indicting war criminals may have on future peace talks, it remains a fact that United States law allows indictments to be kept secret. Courts throughout the United States frequently seal indictments. Secrecy is one of the major characteristics of grand jury proceedings from which indictments arise and one that has withstood the test of time. Federal grand jury deliberations and hearings are conducted in secrecy. According to Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure for the United States District Courts,