(Pt I is here: ‘The Intercept’s Most Recent Screed against Julian Assange’;
Also, see a similar indictment a week or so later: ‘The Intercept Attacks WikiLeaks on Behalf of Democrats’, Danny Haiphong, blackagendareport.com, Dec. 6, 2017
“WikiLeaks has done humanity a service by exposing the Democratic Party as but another organ of the rich.”
Now you may wonder why I call this a con, a hoodwinking: ‘Free Press Group Ready to Cut Off WikiLeaks’; The Freedom of the Press Foundation routed half a million dollars to WikiLeaks. But Assange’s embrace of Trump split the group’s board, and now it’s on the verge of a major break; Kevin Poulsen and Spencer Ackerman, thedailybeast.com, Nov. 16, 2017
…and I’ll get to that in a minute or so. But yes, the self-same Spencer Ackerman, formerly at Firedoglake, then the Guardian, who did some good work there, especially on Chicago’s Dark Prison, Homan Square. His Twit name is still @attackerman. But what a fine journalistic magazine The Daily Beast do be (on Twitter): @thedailybeast “Scoops, Scandals and Secret Worlds”
“In May 2017 Pulitzer Prize winning national security reporter Spencer Ackerman left the Guardian and joined The Daily Beast. When asked about the move Ackerman said, “The Daily Beast is the place to do the kind of journalism that matters most right now…” , via The Daily Beast at Wikipedia
Aside from hitting Julian Assange and WikiLeaks in much the same vein as the Intercept did one day later (nah, it wasn’t a coordinated attack, I’m sure), they bring in some new testifiers, as well, many of which belong to the good whistleblower team, and their funding oligarch, as well. The title’s simply a grift to bring their collective indictments.
There are others, but among the most grievous is demonstrating that Assaange, or one of his team, threatened delicate flower Xeni Jardin’s life. (nom de plume meaning ‘protector of flowers’; born -_ Hamm’) A six by eight or so version of this photo is on the original piece of…’journalism’. Note how fragile and sensitive she looks.
Here’s how the authors allege that conversation went, with no evidence, I’d add, but that’s okay, including whether it we Assange messaging, or someone else using third person:
“She voiced some of her frustration in a tweet during the Charlotte rally. “Trump, his sons, and his surrogates are now dropping WikiLeaks into their anti-American rants like a hashtag,” Jardin commented. “Strangest of bedfellows.”
Assange was watching.
He responded in a series of direct messages to Jardin, at first referencing himself in the third person and the majestic plural, as he often does. “Since JA has never met or spoken to you we find it odd you should hold such a view,” read the message. “So what’s it based on?”
The messages went on to suggest Jardin praise Trump and his people for “doing something useful for once” by promoting WikiLeaks, “instead of, outrageously, suggesting that it is some form of anti-Americanism.”
“Hi there Julian. Is that a command?” Jardin shot back.
“If you can’t support the organization FPF [Freedom of the Press Foundation] was founded to support perhaps you should resign,” wrote Assange. After a pause, he repeated the suggestion. “You have a duty as a board member. If you can’t dispense it, perhaps you should resign.”
Knowing Assange’s reputation for vindictiveness, Jardin interpreted the messages as a personal threat.
She politely asked Assange not to contact her again, and then forwarded the exchange to the foundation’s board. “Oh my god,” replied Cusack, a friend of Jardin who’d joined the board at her invitation. “The only thing one can say is the pressure on him is incredible and everyone has a breaking point.” (Cusack declined to comment for this story; Assange did not immediately respond to a request to do so.)”
Note: they never say if he did later, or how he’d responded to questions of their cutting off his funding avenues.) Deeper into the article:
“Jardin says she felt unsupported in the meeting [one to discuss cutting off WikiLeaks’ funding channel], and four days later she told the foundation she was taking a leave of absence. Jardin is a cancer survivor, and she was then battling life threatening side-effects from treatment. “There is nothing like the threat of death to help you clarify what you spend your time on,” she says. On Dec. 2, she quietly resigned from the board, citing her health.”
“The next month, nine days after Trump’s election victory, Freedom of the Press Foundation held its board meeting. Jardin brought up the issue of Assange, his messages to her, and the foundation’s continued support of WikiLeaks.
Much had changed since the foundation was formed. Today it has a $1.5 million annual budget and a staff of 15. Taking donations for WikiLeaks and other groups has become only a tiny part of the foundation’s work. In 2013, for example, the foundation took over development of SecureDrop, an open-source tool designed to make it safer for whistleblowers to submit information to reporters. Under the foundation’s stewardship, SecureDrop today is running in dozens of newsrooms, including The New York Times, The Washington Post, the Associated Press, and Bloomberg.
That ‘news’ Tim Shorrock’s also saw, bless his heart.
Now you’ll remember that Buzzfeed, the NYT, and WaPo are all on the ‘approved list’ of PropOrNot, Democrat mouthpieces all, as well as Spox for the US Empire. Shorrock has a bit of fun on Twitter at Buzzfeed’s expense as well…But the organization has sure pared down the list; wonder whassup with that? Others besides Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism must have threatened them with lawsuits. Light bulb: look for it, ya great idjit!!! Eureka, here it is as of August 6. Whoa, Nellie, it’s long.
How did I miss that part of the Intercept’s reasons for nuking Assange’s whales was to demonstrate that as he’s partisan for Trump (“..in the final months of the campaign NBC reporters found, Trump referenced WikiLeaks 145 times”!), unreliable, and not worthy of receiving material from whistleblowers and longer? Was the fact that TI had outed whistleblower Reality Winner glaring enough to dry up sources until…some military insiders told them about Trump’s alleged plans to create his own spy agency with Erik Prince and Ollie North that would report to CIA Director Pompeo directly that Greyson Smythe had brought to the Café? I confess that I hadn’t clicked in, given my distaste for the Intercept.
But the simple fact has been: various individuals have continued to leak to individuals, but not to TI nearly as much. But as for the hidden agenda in this ‘news item’, at least the authors finally got to some of it:
“The symbolic import is much larger. The Freedom of the Press Foundation is something of a Justice League for the online privacy, transparency, civil liberties, whistleblower, and press-rights communities. Its board of directors includes Edward Snowden, the National Security Agency whistleblower; Daniel Ellsberg of the Pentagon Papers; open-internet pioneer John Perry Barlow; Citizenfour filmmaker Laura Poitras and her fellow Intercept founder Glenn Greenwald, the two journalists to whom Snowden provided his trove; the actor/activist John Cusack; Electronic Frontier Foundation activism director Rainey Reitman; technologist Micah Lee; and journalist/activist Timm, who founded the group with Reitman.”
And they finally get to the nitty-gritty:
“The foundation’s impending split with Assange is a microcosm of a broader anxiety over him amongst his erstwhile allies now that WikiLeaks has made common cause with extreme right-wing forces, principally Donald Trump [wd here: the DMs with Trump, Jr., but CNN says: “there may be more!!”] and Vladimir Putin. Some consider WikiLeaks’ transparency mission to dwarf Assange’s personal crusades and transgressions—which go beyond politics and into allegations of sexual assault.”…
…while some board members claim later that his personal decisions have nothing to do with cutting off their funding channel…if they do, of course. But the yellow journalistic hyperlinlink above goes to a BBC timeline that requires scrolling to the very end where one finds: ‘‘19 May 2017 Sweden’s director of public prosecutions announces that the rape investigation into Mr Assange is being dropped’. But get a load of this chicanery:
“Later, a rape allegation in Sweden, and Assange’s decision to take refuge at the Ecuadorian embassy rather than confront the case, cost him more support, particularly as he dodged a reckoning and portrayed himself as a political prisoner. (Assange claims he evaded the case for fear Sweden would extradite him to the U.S.)”
WTF? Of course Sweden would extradite him to Amerika! Good god-all-friday.
John Pilger provides the 411:
Ah, but Saint Snowden is really most sincerely bothered by “Assange’s wholesale dumping of stolen DNC emails”! One hit at Assange’s ‘partisan for Trump and Putin Assange to quip:
“Opportunism won’t earn you a pardon from Clinton.” And of course Ed wouldn’t whore for a pre-emptive pardon, would he? Nah.
But among his ‘lefty and libertarian’ former allies, Snowden had once stated that he stole the NSA documents to start a conversation, and that if people voted to be spied on, well, fine. And Glenn Greenwald once trumpeted that he’d vote for ‘any candidate, left, right or center, who opposed the NSA”
“Last year, Assange’s wholesale dumping of stolen DNC emails drew criticism from Edward Snowden. “Democratizing information has never been more vital, and @Wikileaks has helped,” Snowden tweeted. “But their hostility to even modest curation is a mistake.”
There’s so much more there that could be considered, including a fishy-smelling report by AP (one of the SecureDrop agencies), Wikieaks and Saudi Arabia, but…this is already too long. As for The Intercept, they’ve been batting for the Dems and the Empire in some pretty creepy ways, recently extolling the magnificent virtues of the White Helmets (as did Democracy Now!), a disgusting psyop that had long been discredited even when Maz Hussain had written it. But this just in, and christ-in-a-canoe: