Assuming he gets to trial, and has lawyers that understand how to use the media, I think it may be difficult to convince the entire jury to prosecute.

Rehashing US war crimes, which would certainly come up, won't be great for the prosecution either.

The jury will be sequestered to avoid media influence. This is common practice in high-profile cases.

The judge will set firm boundaries for what the jury can and cannot consider in their deliberations and while the jury is actually free to use any criteria they want, it will be very heavily implied that they cannot. The court will do everything in their power to make the jury believe they must convict based on the evidence presented and the rule of law.

Similarly the court will put significant limitations on what can and cannot be presented as evidence. US's commission of war crimes is (arguably) irrelevant as regards the crime in question, so I won't be surprised to see that bringing it up will not be permitted.

This is all fairly standard US court stuff.

The media work starts before the trial starts.

... and anybody who's been exposed to it is excluded from the jury.

Yes, that means juries are usually composed of uninformed idiots. Lawyers mostly like it that way.

I am skeptical the process really works that way. I'm sure they ask the right questions during selection. I doubt they get the right answers.

> Rehashing US war crimes, which would certainly come up, won't be great for the prosecution either.

Assuming the judge doesn't block that line of argument.

He's charged with espionage for material related to a war crime. It's not a peripheral issue.

I've seen "non peripheral issues" blocked by hostile judges in plenty of cases, especially cases when classified information comes into play. I hope you're right, but think the USA will make sure this is heard by a judge who will happily toe their line.

Ellsberg was not permitted to mention what was released in his defense, Assange likely won't either.

Almost 50% of Americans voted for Trump. Almost 50% did it again a second time.

It's not that Voting for Trump is in any way related to being against Assange (It's my understanding that Wikileaks is well liked within that community), but I've learned to to speculate on what Americans might do.

I've taken to just expecting the worst possible outcome from any decision.

Right, but juries don't convict on a majority.

Trump's feelings could get hurt at some perceived slight at any moment, and he could suddenly turn his cult against Assange on a dime, just like he did with Netanyahu. Like if he got the idea in his fat head that Assange didn't do enough to help him overturn the election that he lost due to his own incompetence and corruption.

‘F*ck Him!’ Trump Reportedly Furious With Netanyahu Congratulating Biden, Hasn’t Spoken to Him Since

https://www.mediaite.com/trump/fck-him-trump-reportedly-furi...

>Former President Donald Trump is reportedly livid with Benjamin Netanyahu. At issue? Congratulations that former Israeli Prime Minister expressed to President Joe Biden following the 2020 general election.

>This is according to a new book from Axios writer Barak Ravid who reports:

>>Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu were the closest of political allies during the four years they overlapped in office, at least in public. Not anymore. “I haven’t spoken to him since,” Trump said of the former Israeli prime minister. “F*k him.”

>>What he’s saying: Trump repeatedly criticized Netanyahu during two interviews for my book, “Trump’s Peace: The Abraham Accords and the Reshaping of the Middle East.” The final straw for Trump was when Netanyahu congratulated President-elect Biden for his election victory while Trump was still disputing the result.

>“The first person that congratulated [Biden] was Bibi Netanyahu, the man that I did more for than any other person I dealt with. … Bibi could have stayed quiet,” Trump is quoted by Ravid as saying. “He has made a terrible mistake.”

Half the people I know who voted for Trump are pro-Assange.

Almost 50% of Americans voted for Biden. Almost 50% did it again a second time.

It's not that Voting for Biden is in any way related to being against Assange (It's my understanding that Wikileaks is well liked within that community), but I've learned to to speculate on what Americans might do.

I've taken to just expecting the worst possible outcome from any decision.

The internet has predicted the imminent assassination of every prominent opposition politician, journalist and speaker for as long as I've been online and it's never happened. Glenn Greenwood is fine, Sy Hersh is fine, Bernie Sanders and Ron Paul are fine. Meanwhile Julian Assange was happy to have people believe the DNC leak came from Seth Rich despite knowing he got it from Russia.