It does indeed seem that Assange has been (A) a Russian puppet, and (B) persecuted unjustly.<p>Even if Assange worked entirely at the direction of Russia, the Constitution of the USA explicitly prohibits laws that abridge the freedom of the press. If Assange was merely the publisher, rather than the leaker or hacker of classified information, then it's hard to argue that the USA government's position is apolitical in its nature. Indeed, that position would seem to be entirely dissociated from the most basic protections offered by USA law.<p>Politicians don't have infinite discretion to create laws where there are none, or to nullify legal protections that are explicitly stated in the Constitution. If they bag Assange and make an example of him, they do so at risk of diminishing the already strained rule of law in the USA.<p>Assange's persecution would be a huge win for Russia and China, because it would give those nations an opening to draw moral equivalence between their repressive actions and those of the USA.<p>On the other hand, Assange's persecution would do very little to dissuade future leakers and hackers, who will simply be more careful in choosing how to publish classified information.<p>The best thing for the USA to do would be to try Assange and find him "not guilty" if he was simply a publisher. The strength of the relationship between the USA, Britain, and Ecuador would be demonstrated, reinforcing American hegemony in Europe and Latin America. However, by reinforcing the inviolability of the First Amendment, the USA would rebuild some sense of exceptionalism among the world's powers. ("We're all powerful, but only the USA arrived at power with a healthy respect for human rights and strict adherence to the law above all.")