Were you one of the people that said he wouldn't be extradited to the US?
Assange was arrested in his absence and wanted for questioning in relation to accusations against him of rape and sexual molestation. This was the first step in the criminal prosecution procedure in Sweden, and only after the questioning would the prosecution authority be able to formally indict him.[10]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assange_v_Swedish_Prosecution_...
Everyone repeating this nonsense should just take the time to read the British High Court judgment, which sets it all out very clearly.
It's worth reading this interview [1] with Nils Melzer, the UN Special Rapporteur on torture, which reveals in shocking detail the level of manipulation around this entire case.
As Melzer says "You just have to look at how the case was run: For Sweden, it was never about the interests of the two women."
[1] https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
I do not see how that conflicts with the interests of the two women.
It's really worth reading the interview closely to understand how thoroughly justice has been perverted in numerous countries to get at someone who revealed horrendous crimes.
It's worth engaging in the facts on this issue, rather than gripping onto a received narrative in dismissive fashion, and the interview really goes into significant detail, including behind-the-scenes behaviour of Sweden that Melzer was privy to as UN Special Rapporteur on torture.
It's one of those articles where people go in with the perspective you show here, and come out the end of it stunned by the truth of Assange's unjust treatment.
In fact Melzer starts out by stating he began with the same attitude, initially refusing the case as "My impression, largely influenced by the media, was also colored by the prejudice that Julian Assange was somehow guilty and that he wanted to manipulate me."
It is probably one of the best summaries of his case I've read, from a highly credible, independent investigator:
https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
It's always surprising to see just how grubby Assange's defenders are willing to get, up to and including rape apologism.
The accusation you raise is a key part of the interview with Melzer.
The original witness statement was intentionally destroyed, and the supervisor of the policewoman who conducted the questioning wrote an email telling her to rewrite the statement.
(The original copies of the mail exchanges between the Swedish police are actually displayed in the article.)
The statement that forms the basis of that claim "was edited without the involvement of the woman in question and it wasn’t signed by her. It is a manipulated piece of evidence out of which the Swedish authorities then constructed a story of rape."
As to your attempted lazy smearing – it doesn't really do you any favours here.
As a final plea, perhaps read-up on the details so you can get a better understanding of the case:
https://www.republik.ch/2020/01/31/nils-melzer-about-wikilea...
If indeed this evidence was all fabricated (I doubt it, but who knows), then the best venue for evaluating that claim would have been a Swedish court.
Now we will never really know exactly how strong the case was. But it was strong enough to justify bringing Assange to trial, and he has done himself no favours by hiding in an embassy for seven years.
The idea that it was harder to extradite him to the US from the UK than from Sweden, and that the extradition to Sweden was a pretext, was a very odd one - a priori I would have said it was the other way round.