Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: The Swedish Prosecutor Lied As Charged. Admits No Legal Impediment to London Interview w/Assange. [View all]
freshwest
(53,661 posts)85. Well, I don't know...
And with money comes...
BTW, nice gif. I'm stealing it.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
421 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
The Swedish Prosecutor Lied As Charged. Admits No Legal Impediment to London Interview w/Assange. [View all]
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
OP
On the other thread DUers suddenly have amnesia that they ever believed Ny's lies
riderinthestorm
Mar 2015
#1
There is way, way too much evidence that they did indeed claim it 'was against Swedish Law' to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#2
As with Snowden, the important thing is to continue to maintain a vilification narrative.
Warren Stupidity
Mar 2015
#4
You are right, as it turns out. Now they are attempting to attempting to move the goalposts
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#150
I wonder why people allow others to do their thinking for them. We on the Left were not the kind to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#212
I remember that, and that it was always the same group of posters whose screen names escape me...
1monster
Mar 2015
#252
You are correct, it IS always the same few. As for Snowden, Greenwald, and now just about
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#256
Indeed--so this thread, where the OP is debunked below, won't be scrubbed. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#131
The prosecutor LIED and has now been forced to admit that lie. She, iow, has been DEBUNKED.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#247
'Allegations' btw, there have no charges filed against Assange. And those allegations began in
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#276
It isn't a good catch---sabrina didn't include that Ny wasn't directed by the courts to try a London
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#88
The Prosecutor and her fans LIED. For years. Feel free to explain why NO CHARGES
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#233
That is exactly what they are claiming. Having no response to the LIES told by the Prosecutor for
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#249
There never was any 'legal impediment' to interviewing Assange in London. Is it rude to tell the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#307
Sssshhh, we are in the process of attempting to create amnesia regarding the years long false claims
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#314
The right thing for them to do now, including all the Right Wing 'Journalists' who shouted from the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#8
That isn't the question. 'After all this will the lying Swedish Prosecutor FINALLY file
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#32
Here's a thread from 2012, where Spider Jerusalem explains the Swedish legal process to you
tammywammy
Mar 2015
#45
Amazing, isnt it? Even with the evidence of the egregious lies told by the Prosecutor and her
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#245
Lol! It certainly is a lesson on why the internet's legal experts should always be taken with a
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#251
Yes, I created an OP here recently that attracted many experts in the finer points of Swedish law.
pa28
Mar 2015
#409
As someone said in this thread, the proper thing for all the 'legal experts' to do now would be to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#410
Don't worry, I don't give legal advice on the internet. I simply report facts from those who
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#419
Of note--the prosecutor was ordered by the courts to try to interview and arrest Assange in London--
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#92
Of further note. The Prosecutor lied by claiming she could not interview Assange in London forcing
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#260
Are you suggesting that the Swedish Court is bending the established law in this case,
1monster
Mar 2015
#274
Good question. It appears there never was any legal impediment to conducting this interview in
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#309
I know the Swedish Process. Now explain why this Prosecutor DIDN'T know it. Why did she claim
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#130
You've been given the Court of Appeals link a few times now. Is it that you don't understand
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#134
When did the law change? When did they decide that THEY COULD interview Assange in London after
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#141
Did you not read the article on the Court of Appeals decision and look at the date? That would
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#143
Was their excuse for not filing Charges against Assange 'There is a legal impediment' to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#148
Again, Sabrina, if you don't read the material offered, I can't help you. As the other attorney on
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#153
Was this used an excuse for years, when it was not true, as many of us stated?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#156
Again, Sabrina, I and others have pointed out the Court of Appeals November 2014 decision.
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#161
Again, msanthrope, why did YOU cling to what we know now was an egregious lie told by the prosecutor
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#235
Um no.....you're quoting a defense attorney who just had a ruling go against
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#176
Why would the UK refuse approval? They've been spending big bucks LEOs covering Assange to
1monster
Mar 2015
#277
Why did she wait nearly five years to make that trip? Why did she LIE? Why did she claim
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#237
I know a diversionary tactic when I see one. The question is WHY would anyone on THIS forum
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#328
Lol, still avoiding answering the question. I don't blame you, there is only one answer.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#343
She had to be 'ordered' to finally stop lying as to why she has failed to file charges.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#360
Like Obama, I can wait patiently and let the various players work this out for themselves.
randome
Mar 2015
#366
You were wrong, can't escape that fact. The 'players'? Well we know there ARE 'players' but I am
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#372
There are no charges filed against Assange. There are 'allegations' many of which
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#236
Who are the bootlickers you speak of? The ones who think a rapist should have a trial?
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#93
That sounds like 'woo'. Since not one charge has ever been FILED against Assange..
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#244
Um, no.....just like OJ is a murderer. Assange is a rapist.....and I get to
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#194
'It IS embarrassing for you to have your whole argument for 4 years shot down'.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#304
Lol, so you are looking into your crystal ball again? I suggest you throw it away, it appears to be
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#312
Glad you got rid of that crystal ball. Why did she have to be ORDERED to go to London?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#317
The pretzel logic required for rape apologia is stunning. .....imagine, one cannot call
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#228
'Pretzel logic' thank you, that is a good way to describe the impossible twisting and turning
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#339
So it's not one of those 'legal opinions' you have been providing us with re this case for so long?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#334
Assange denies those 'allegations' cobbled together with zero evidence to back them up and
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#279
Yes, we KNOW that Ny was so ignorant of Swedish Law that after YEARS of lying, or not knowing,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#254
Why has this lying prosecutor NEVER filed charges in all these years? SHE claimed that
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#35
There are four charges on his arrest warrant. He has been charged. He has not been indicted.
hack89
Mar 2015
#58
Wrong, AGAIN. Could you please stop commenting on a case you clearly know nothing about?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#127
Ahem .... warrants do NOT equal Charges! So, again, where are the charges filed by
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#250
Lol, so you admit finally what you have been trying to deny, there are no charges filed against
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#299
Thanks for finally admitting that there have never been charges filed against Assange. That took a
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#359
Well you've been wrong so far about everything else, so I'm not going to take your speculations
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#365
And yet, he voluntarily stayed in Sweden long after he was supposed to leave, voluntarily went to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#370
If I were you I would stop while I was only this far behind. Because I might be in the mood to show
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#373
She has no CASE. THAT is why she doesn't want an interview. I guess you didn't follow the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#374
If we're demanding accountability let's ask the prosecutor to explain her years of lying.
pa28
Mar 2015
#66
Are you trying to be funny? And no offense, but msanthrope, sadly, has proven over the years,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#323
Has the offer of an interview (from Ny) in the Ecuadoran Embassy even been offered yet?
1monster
Mar 2015
#283
You're asking the wrong questions. WHY did this prosecutor NOT FILE CHARGES when we know for sure
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#11
No, Prosecution LIES! She LIED. Is that not clear to you now? I'll be happy to explain
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#17
No prosecutor would DARE to lie about their own LEGAL SYSTEM and expect to get away with it.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#37
Er.....yes. As part of the Swedish arrest procedure. They are arresting him. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#145
Sssshhh, legal experts and all that! No charges, no case, DNA provided VOLUNTARILY YEARS AGO.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#416
It didn't happen years ago because they never had a case. You can bet everything you have that
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#15
Will the Prosecutor FINALLY file charges? And surely you know that Assange DID
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#40
He did leave Sweden the day after the prosecutor notified his lawyer of an interview
hack89
Mar 2015
#60
Naturally they should travel to another country to question a fugitive from justice
BainsBane
Mar 2015
#19
The most important question is: WHY have charges never been filed by the Swedish Prosecutor?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#152
There ARE NO CHARGES filed against Assange. What are you talking about?? There are allegatons,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#214
Your lack of understanding of this case is astounding. So once again, WHERE ARE THE CHARGES
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#234
Those that hate whistle-blowers live in their states of denial willfully. There is no
rhett o rick
Mar 2015
#325
Did you disagree with something he said? The FACTS of this case are clear and have been
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#327
Being open to listen to facts is a trait commonly found with liberals. It's a conservative mindset
rhett o rick
Mar 2015
#331
Yes, and Liberals tend to be interested in facts. I have asked, eg, that the person who
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#332
Did I strike a nerve? I notice that you don't offer anything except cute (?) comments.
rhett o rick
Mar 2015
#329
Why did the prosecutor lie about interviewing Assange in London? She DID lie, and you know it.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#216
Who are you calling a 'rape apologist'?? Are you calling ME a 'rape apologist'. Other DUers here?
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#324
Do you speak for Zappaman? If so, then go right ahead and name names. It is NOT
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#407
Reserved for those in the rarified air of privilege, unassailable by lessers.
freshwest
Mar 2015
#385
So, why do you think the Prosecutor LIED about Swedish Law for so long Sid?? n/t
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#42
I'm not the one saying 'we can't interview him in London, am I? Why did she say that for so many
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#138
Know your BFEE: WikiLeaks Stratfor Dump Exposes Continued Secret Government Warmongering
Octafish
Mar 2015
#104
Wikileaks had to be silenced because they exposed the corruption of the Big Banks. They were about
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#209
Yep, that is another aspect of this case, Rove's 'advice' to the Swedish Right Wing PM. Not to
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#43
HEre--it's the Court of Appeals decision in November, where the court suggested that
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#86
Curious, so if she breaks the laws of her own country and arrests him after the interview
Rex
Mar 2015
#94
Sweden has a very different system from ours. I think what everyone here is missing is that this is
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#96
I've never had an innocent client behave as Assange has. I've had rapist clients behave like him,
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#105
I had some rough friends early in life, some innocent and some guilty as hell for various petty
Rex
Mar 2015
#111
That is exactly correct. Innocent people want it cleared up, right away. nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#125
What BS. I've known many innocent people who have finally broken down and accepted
1monster
Mar 2015
#306
Assange wanted it cleared up right away, but the Swedish Prosecutor did everything in her power
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#320
If the "rape victim" insists that there was no rape (stipulating that the rape victim is of age and
1monster
Mar 2015
#303
Pretty damned hard to win a conviction if the "victim" denies the crime ever happened without
1monster
Mar 2015
#395
Yes, and that "the women they've nearly killed" is pretty much the "overwhelming evidence to the
1monster
Mar 2015
#413
You are only making things worse for the Prosecutor. She didn't know her own laws? She didn't know
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#157
Sabrina....no one can make you read the 11/14 Court of Appeals decision. And no one can
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#162
I don't see where that quote implies interviewing Assange elsewhere is against the law?
Fumesucker
Mar 2015
#241
I, myself, have posted that information to sabrina scores of times. Her narrative does not deviate
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#135
Now Assange is interview and then arrested. What did you think was going to happen?
hack89
Mar 2015
#71
So they're finally going to interview him now, and move the prosecution forward?
Erich Bloodaxe BSN
Mar 2015
#46
Well, he fled Sweden before his scheduled interview there....here, Sweden has already indicated they
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#91
Because then it sounds all spy-novel-ish! That makes it SO much more true! (nt)
jeff47
Mar 2015
#128
James Blond, living in the Ladies' Loo in the embassy.....no one would believe it is I wrote it...nt
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#137
Also, it wasn't until November that the Swedish courts suggested she try a London interview.
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#87
Exactly---the OP seems to be arguing that this rapist deserves special treatment. As a criminal
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#90
Wait! It was November! when the Swedish Court "suggested" that Ny interview Assange in London?
1monster
Mar 2015
#311
Easy. Until Sweden guarantees he won't be arrested, Assange will continue to obfuscate.
randome
Mar 2015
#108
No--I just figured out Ny's fairly brilliant strategy......the Court of Appeals ruling in November
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#101
He's not going to be able to delay. Ecuador wants him out of that embassy. Interestingly,
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#109
Because that nefarious Obama will clone it and spread it across the continent!
randome
Mar 2015
#115
Assange is the one stringing this along....like a guilty man. Two years of appeals in the UK
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#151
Well, yes. James Blond has essentially imprisoned himself, and public support has completely eroded
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#159
He was free on bail in the UK for a couple years, and then in the embassy, of his own volition,
cemaphonic
Mar 2015
#200
Got it. So the only thing Assange does now is further strain public perception of him.
randome
Mar 2015
#107
This makes me think, probably a good idea if visiting another country to know something
Rex
Mar 2015
#95
So they are extending the case and nullifying the SOL (or pushing the SOL to a future date)?
Rex
Mar 2015
#129
Rex, it's simple. The Swedish Prosecutor claimed that under Swedish Law before filing charges,
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#268
Actually it was Bank of America who most likely set him up. The set up began a couple of weeks
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#286
Assange (and others) WELCOME the interview. This isn't even a question nt
riderinthestorm
Mar 2015
#206
Yes....his Swedish lawyer testified that he had advised Assange that he would
msanthrope
Mar 2015
#238
You mean they have never been 'investigated'?? But we were told they WERE. Lol!
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#211
Assange should run as MP for the Cities of London and Westminster constituency!
struggle4progress
Mar 2015
#218
Thanks you, sabrina 1, for your dogged pursuit of this story. Vilifying whistleblowers is ...
Scuba
Mar 2015
#227
I don't have to conveniently set aside anything. He's being smeared for exposing crimes. Period.
Scuba
Mar 2015
#353
Facts are facts, Scuba and the propagandists, regarding actual Journalists and Whistle Blowers
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#271
We know it won't stop the propaganda. However it grows weaker by the day as the
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#259
I find it interesting that the UK spent millions of pounds to have their cops hound Assange.
backscatter712
Mar 2015
#263
That's exactly how it smells to most rational human beings. The despicable part of it is how
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#285
Kicked for the ultimate disinfection - SUNSHINE… Kicked for the Whistle Blowers
MrMickeysMom
Mar 2015
#289
The question is 'can the Prosecutor refuse to do what she has refused to do for years now'
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#301
Amazing that anyone with that patriarchal view of women should have been allowed anywhere near DU
Fumesucker
Mar 2015
#340
Exactly, but that is who we are supposed to 'look to' for 'facts' about this case. The man has
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#344
I don't do upset. Especially in response to a transparent attempt to provoke me.
randome
Mar 2015
#345
You seem to care an awful lot about Wikileaks. So does the US, the UK, Swedish prosecutors and right
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#346
Yes, you are correct, that is a good analogy of the false claimers over the past several years.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#379
Can you provide something, ANYTHING about this case, some documentation, or anything, that
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#382
So nothing at all to add to the 'documentation' in this case? Okay, good to know.
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#397
You must know that people who have READ documents related to this case, witness interviews, police
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#404
Why did Assange flee Sweden right after the prosecutor scheduled an interview with his lawyer?
hack89
Mar 2015
#349
Ignoring the facts about that too, are you? Assange was told by the Prosecutor who had no time
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#351
That seems to have been the position of the Swedish Prosecutor, assuming she
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#357
By being a Publisher and prize winning Journalist. Democracies flourish when they have a free and
sabrina 1
Mar 2015
#380
Hmmm... What are your thoughts on the Pentagon Papers release? Bernstein and Woodwards
1monster
Mar 2015
#398
