SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the shoulda-taken-the-tea-chest-option-years-back dept.
Breaking: Met police confirm that Julian Assange has been arrested at the Ecuadorian embassy.
Mr Assange took refuge in the embassy seven years ago to avoid extradition to Sweden over a sexual assault case that has since been dropped.
The Met Police said he was arrested for failing to surrender to the court.
Ecuador's president Lenin Moreno said it withdrew Mr Assange's asylum after his repeated violations to international conventions.
But WikiLeaks tweeted that Ecuador had acted illegally in terminating Mr Assange's political asylum "in violation of international law".
[...] Scotland Yard said it was invited into the embassy by the ambassador, following the Ecuadorian government's withdrawal of asylum.
After his arrest for failing to surrender to the court, police said he had been further arrested on behalf of US authorities under an extradition warrant.
He doesn't look happy, to say the least.
Update: As this is a breaking story, more information is coming out regularly - one source that updates their reports frequently is Zero Hedge - thanks boru!
Previously: New Analysis of Swedish Police Report Confirms Julian Assange's Version in Sweden's Case
Ecuador Reportedly Almost Ready to Hand Julian Assange Over to UK Authorities
UK Said Assange Would Not be Extradited If He Leaves Embassy Refuge
Inadvertent Court Filing Suggests that the U.S. DoJ is Preparing to Indict Julian Assange
U.S. Ramping Up Probe Against Julian Assange, WikiLeaks Says
Ecuador Denies That Julian Assange Will be Evicted From Embassy in London
(Score: 2) by julian on Thursday April 11 2019, @06:26PM (5 children)
What planet are you living on? First of all, no one has seen the Mueller Report yet. I haven't. You certainly haven't. So I'm amazed at your credulity for taking Barr at his word. The evidence of Russian interference in our election has never been stronger. The more we learn about Facebook and Cambridge Analytica the more likely it seems that we in fact have underestimated the effect the Russian influence and disninfo campaign had. The new book Zucked by Roger McNamee is a must read. He lays out the facts clearly and he brings the receipts.
It was always a long shot that Trump himself would be directly involved. That's not how these things work. I wasn't expecting that outcome. What little we've learned seems to prove exactly the case that "Russiagate" journalists and analysts were making the whole time. The point you claim has been refuted is a point no one was making. The Seth Rich hoax has already been debunked in the comments here.
There are a lot of useful idiots on the far-left who seem to side with the Trumpists on Russia for the following reasons:
1. They hate Hillary Clinton, and want her to be *solely* responsible for losing the election to validate their preferred candidate, Sanders
2. They hate the Western neoliberal world order, and the USA in particular, and enjoy seeing one of our enemies score a hit. They may not like Putin, but they enjoy seeing Uncle Sam's hypocrisy on display.
3. They think we deserved to have our elections attacked because we've done this to other countries in the past
4. They despise the anti-Russia coalition because it includes centrists and conservatives, and the far-left has a spiteful insistence on ideological purity
5. They wrongly believe holding Russia responsible is just a cover, a convenient stalking-horse by neoliberals and neocons to restart the cold war, sell weapons, and launch proxy wars against Russia
Then there are the actual Trump supporters who discount the evidence of Russian interference because it helped them. We're seeing all kinds in the comment section here and all over the web.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @07:05PM
I'm definitely on a different planet than you.
At least you dropped "collusion" and now it is "influence". I'd be more worried about the UK and Israel's "influence" if I were you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @07:43PM
It hasn't been debunked anywhere. It comes down to whether Julian Assange lied about it or not because he made some very obvious insinuations. But I don't understand why he wouldn't just come out and say it if he was going to hint at it. Same with Kim Dotcom, why not share the info you claim to have?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:39PM (2 children)
It is beyond insane that these people would trust bill fucking barr's word. Not only was the guy running the pardon team that killed the iran contra investigation in order to protect Bush I, [salon.com] he also started the mass surveillance program [aclu.org] that was the progenitor of the system that Snowden blew the whistle on.
Also trump gave Barr's son-in-law a sweet gig after Barr was hired. [vanityfair.com] Nepotism, what's that?
This guy is a pure incarnation of everything the far left loathes about american governance and yet they prefer his narrative over the evidence of their own eyes and ears like trump calling for russia to hack clinton on live television and DJTjr releasing his own emails saying "I love it" in response to an offer of clandestine help as "part of Russia and its government’s support for Mr Trump.” [theguardian.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 11 2019, @10:48PM
That's the swamp for you, the entire thing is filled to the brim with corruption.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 12 2019, @12:14AM
Look at this, James Comey says electronic surveillance is not spying:
https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1116440871099039746 [twitter.com]