| That might be a concern, but I doubt it. He was very forthcoming while he was in Sweden. He showed up for questioning and was given permission to leave. He's asked to be questioned remotely, and Sweden refuses to charge him or question him. If you've read anything about the incidents, it's a very weak case for something that shouldn't be a crime to begin with. None of us know what the US is doing, if anything. We do know, by their own admission, that they began an aggressive investigation into whether or not Assange could be charged. We also know that everyone known associated with Wikileaks had their twitter and other social accounts subpoenaed. Manning's lawyer also indicated that the DoJ discussed the possibility of a plea bargain. As recently as a few weeks ago, US officials said they are waiting to see how the UK case plays out before charging him. It is more probable than not that after such statements and aggressive investigations, that the US will charge him. It is more probable than not that the reason they have not yet done so, is because it's better for them to let this case finish, as they said. Assange is not under the impression that he is immune to these inevitable charges and extradition in any of the countries involved. He has resigned to the fact that he is likely to face the US DoJ, and an extradition request, one way or another. Assange believes that he has a tactical advantage in this case if this does not happen in Sweden. I don't know all of the reasons for this, but this is not surprising, and he has obviously been advised to exhaust this route by his legal counsel. It's safe to assume that this has been their decision, not his. This is not a conspiracy theory, this is just how court cases work. Even in the US, it is common to fight for the most favorable jurisdiction. The presence of an extradition treaty in both countries does not mean that an extradition request is equally difficult to fight in both countries. This could change depending on laws in a specific country, or even be influenced by public perception or even corruption. When is the last time someone was held for a year and a half in an international dispute to be questioned about a broken or missing condom incident? That makes the least sense. Edit: It's worth noting that according to the hacked stratfor emails, the US already has a sealed indictment for him: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/02/28/1069018/-Leaked-Str... |