>- calling him a journalist is a mighty stretch even before he started, let's call it his "full-stack collaboration" with the Russians
This is wildly unsubstantiated and at best fear mongering propaganda.
>- the alleged crimes were committed against the US, i.e his participation in the exfiltration of secret data from US government. Surely his physical location when committing these crimes should have no bearing on whether it's a criminal matter.
It absolutely should matter. Why should someone who's not a citizen and wasn't located in the US be held to US laws? Does every person on the planet now need to memorize the laws of every country and fear extradition if I were to accidentally view gay porn, which is illegal in Saudi Arabia?
>It absolutely should matter. Why should someone who's not a citizen and wasn't located in the US be held to US laws? Does every person on the planet now need to memorize the laws of every country and fear extradition if I were to accidentally view gay porn, which is illegal in Saudi Arabia?
Your example doesn't really work because it is illegal to view gay porn in Saudi Arabia. If Saudi Arabia decided to outlaw viewing gay porn worldwide, and then another country's government decided that its extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia covers this law, and then you decided to visit such a country and viewed gay porn - yes, you should fear extradition in that case.
By your logic, all one needs to do to hack into US companies and, say, steal trade secrets or money with impunity, or demand ransom, is to be outside the US. But that's not how the world works. In addition, you gotta find a country that doesn't extradite to the US on charges of fraud, and/or theft of trade secrets.
Or, in Assange's case, actively and persistently convincing and coaching someone to exfiltrate top secret data from a US government computer system. Something that, BTW, I look forward to hearing which country in the world does not outlaw and pursue criminal convictions for.
The framework is logically and legally sound, a good idea and a good thing. As to the inputs to the process - quality of laws, wording of extradition treaties - that does vary, so choose travel destinations and elected officials carefully.
This is wildly unsubstantiated and at best fear mongering propaganda.
>- the alleged crimes were committed against the US, i.e his participation in the exfiltration of secret data from US government. Surely his physical location when committing these crimes should have no bearing on whether it's a criminal matter.
It absolutely should matter. Why should someone who's not a citizen and wasn't located in the US be held to US laws? Does every person on the planet now need to memorize the laws of every country and fear extradition if I were to accidentally view gay porn, which is illegal in Saudi Arabia?