[kermitismyhero]

>He would be sent to USA to respond of his alleged crimes in front of a public court of justice.

Haha, no. He'd be sent to a secret FISA Star Chamber. There's no way he'd be tried in public.

And if the Swedish authorities wanted Assange to answer for alleged crimes in Sweden, all they had to do was publicly declare that they wouldn't extradite Assange to the US. That was the sole requirement he had made of the Swedish authorities in exchange for his willingness to return to Sweden. The fact that the Swedish authorities refused even that is deeply suspicious.

[dragonwriter]

> He'd be sent to a secret FISA Star Chamber.

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review only are empowered to handle foreign intelligence surveillance warrant process.

Criminal charges are handled in US District Courts, and are Constitutionally guaranteed to be public.

[kermitismyhero]

>Criminal charges are handled in US District Courts, and are Constitutionally guaranteed to be public.

If you think that the US DOJ hasn't spent a million man-hours to find some way to keep everything as secret as possible, you haven't been paying attention to their actions thus far. They will find some way to kangaroo-court him out of the public eye. They do it with foreign nationals all the time.

[dragonwriter]

> If you think that the US DOJ hasn't spent a million man-hours to find some way to keep everything as secret as possible, you haven't been paying attention to their actions thus far.

I'm pretty sure that they have neither spent that many man-hours nor would get much value from spending anywhere close to that, because the parameters of “as secret as possible” are, while always subject to further litigation around the borders, not so mysterious or difficult to assess that it would take that much work to get a solid idea both where the boundaries were and what the relative risks of various ways of probing the areas where there is remaining uncertainty.

> They will find some way to kangaroo-court him out of the public eye. They do it with foreign nationals all the time.

Not with foreign nationals subjected to formal criminal extradition they don't. Foreign, allegedly unawful, combatants detained by the US military or transferred to their custody by America’s cobelligerents in the context of military conflict, all completely outside of the civilian criminal justice system, sure; foreign parties where the government covertly intervenes with overseas regimes to detain them without involving the US criminal justice system to, that too. But none of those are applicable here.

[ivarb]

It's actually not suspicious. It is simply not something the authorities can legally do.

[lostjohnny]

Swedish have no obligation to say what Assange wants to hear.

It's not a trade, he allegedly raped a girl, that's his problem.

If I was Assange I would want my name clear on rape allegations, I wuoldn't run away from it.