Why is that a weak ass way? It serves 2 purposes. It discredits him and prevents him from leaving the UK.
It didn't prevent him from leaving the UK.
He did that.
Remember, he left Sweden
after they started investigating.
The women didn't trap him.
Its not a weak ass way. Its a very effective way to achive both purposes with a crime that society has deemed that even if you are found not guilty you are a a creep.
Only it doesn't.
Being accused of something like this, especially back in 2010, does next to nothing to a man's career.
And if you
are going to do that, you do it with a substantial accusation of a sex crime.
Remember how easily people started just saying he was prosecuted for a condom breaking?
If you are out to wreck his reputation, you put some meat on the bone.
But here's the problem, your entire argument boils down to "People were out to get Assange, therefore it is impossible he ever did anything wrong."
You see how silly that is, right?
It's the same as Frank's "but this guy caused problems for Israel, therefore he cannot have done anything".
Breaching bail conditions by seeking asylum is hardly a violent crime that threatens society, It hardly warrants extra judicial torture. They were trying to break him. Why would the UK not guarantee the non-extradition unless they knew it was likely gonna be requested? The rape charges were a smokescreen.
Why do you want Assange to get treatment no one else gets regarding extradition?
Why would Assange have thought he was safer in the UK from being extradited than in Sweden?
Please note I'm not defending anything about how the UK handled his imprisonment or the eventual US trial and the godawful plea bargain that resulted.
