Leaked Wikileaks memo to media on what not to say about Assange

It’s anyone’s guess what the intent of this the confidential memo from Wikileaks to media telling them what they couldn’t publish about Julian Assange – ars Technica Please don’t repeat these things WikiLeaks says you can’t say about Assange

A representative of WikiLeaks has sent a “confidential” memo to news outlets including an updated “defamation list” (version 1.2), advising reporters not to mention or publish it. The memo was promptly leaked (update: the first out of the gate to leak was Emma Best of MuckRock). WikiLeaks then linked to a revised, heavily edited and redacted version (version 1.3) they posted “anonymously” on a text paste site.

Here, without further comment or editing, and in its entirety, is the WikiLeaks advisory.

The memo is published.

It is well documented that there is a pervasive climate of inaccurate claims about WikiLeaks and Julian Assange, including purposeful fabrications planted in large and otherwise “reputable” media outlets.

Consequently journalists and publishers have a clear responsibility to carefully fact-check from primary sources and to consult the following list to ensure they are not spreading, and have not spread, defamatory falsehoods about WikiLeaks or Julian Assange.

A number of items on the list start with “It is false and defamatory to suggest…”. Eg:

It is false and defamatory to suggest that Julian Assange is, or has been, “hiding” in the embassy [in fact, his location is well known and his formal legal status is “political refugee”; it is incorrect to suggest that refugees, by virtue of being in the jurisdiction of refuge, are “hiding”].

It is bizarre for a transparency organisation to be trying to tell media what they shouldn’t say.

Media should carefully fact check, but consulting the Wikileaks list should not be the end of any investigation.

I expect that some journalists will take up the challenge and go through the list doing some fact checking of points raised. This one might be worth a look.

It is false and defamatory to suggest that WikiLeaks does not have a perfect record of accurately verifying its publications.

 

US preparing criminal case against Assange

In an apparent accidental revelation it appears that the US are preparing to indict Julian Assange on criminal charges.

Assenge has been confined to the Ecudor’s Embassy in London since 2012 where he received political asylum to protect him from facing charges against him in Sweden.

Assange headed Wikileaks, released hacked Hillary Clinton emails during the 2016 presidential election campaign, which was praised by Donald Trump.

Reuters:  U.S. prepares criminal case against Wikileaks’ Assange

U.S. prosecutors are preparing to pursue a criminal case against Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, escalating a long battle targeting his anti-secrecy group.

According to a Thursday filing in an unrelated criminal case in a Virginia federal court, prosecutors have obtained a sealed indictment against Assange.

The charges were not immediately clear. Thursday’s filing had been sealed, but was made public this week for reasons that were also unclear, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Joshua Stueve, a spokesman for the U.S. attorney’s office in Alexandria, Virginia, said the filing was made an error. Wikileaks said it a Twitter post that it was an “apparent cut-and-paste error.”

The disclosure came as U.S. Special Counsel Robert Mueller investigates possible Russian interference in the 2016 U.S. presidential election, and possible collusion by U.S. President Donald Trump’s White House campaign.

U.S. intelligence agencies have concluded that Russia obtained material through hacking, and Mueller’s office has brought various criminal charges against Russians and Trump associates.

For its part, Wikileaks has faced scrutiny for publishing emails hacked before the election from the Democratic Party and the campaign chairman for Hillary Clinton, who Trump defeated.

U.S. officials have acknowledged that federal prosecutors in Virginia have been conducting a lengthy criminal probe into Assange and Wikileaks.

Greg Barns, an Australian lawyer advising Assange, said in a statement it was “no surprise” that the United States was seeking to charge Assange, and Australian officials should allow Assange to return there.

I presume the US could seek extradition from Australia.

In a statement on Friday, Wikileaks said Assange was willing to work with British officials as long he was not extradited to the United States.

I don’t know if that sort of a deal protecting him from extradition laws and protocols would be possible.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has called Wikileaks a “hostile intelligence service,” making that comment in April 2017 when he ran the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency.

Trump praised Wikileaks during his 2016 campaign.

Trump praises anyone who helps his cause.

Roger Stone under scrutiny in Mueller investigation

Roger Stone, a supporter of and adviser to Donald Trump, is under increasing scrutiny in the Mueller investigation.

He has been connected to Julian Assange and Wikileaks, who drip fed hacked emails related to the Hillary Clinton campaign.

CNN: Roger Stone’s finances examined by special counsel

Special counsel Robert Mueller’s team has been probing Roger Stone’s finances as it summons a series of witnesses to gather more information about one of President Donald Trump’s longtime advisers, according to people familiar with the situation. Mueller’s team has questioned associates about Stone’s finances, including his tax returns.

The interest in Stone’s finances could be tied to Mueller’s charge of investigating Russian meddling in the 2016 election and potential collusion, though another possibility is Mueller is pursuing something unrelated that turned up in the course of the investigation.

Even after he officially parted ways with Trump’s presidential campaign in its early days, Stone remained a staunch supporter and friend of Trump’s. During the campaign, he launched a pro-Trump super PAC called Committee to Restore America’s Greatness.

Now, the interest in Stone’s finances has created a new sense of alarm among his associates.

Whatever the reasoning, the probe into Stone’s finances should give him cause for concern, Zeldin said. Stone appears to recognize that.

“The special counsel having found no evidence or proof whatsoever of Russian collusion, trafficking in allegedly hacked emails with WikiLeaks or advance knowledge of the publication of (then-Clinton campaign chair John) Podesta’s emails now seems to be combing through every molecule of my existence including my personal life, political activities and business affairs to conjure up some offense to charge me with either to silence me or induce me to testify against the President,” Stone told CNN. “I have no intention of being silenced or turning my back on President Trump.”

Stone has come under public scrutiny, in part, because of a prescient prediction during the 2016 campaign. In a now-infamous tweet, Stone predicted trouble for Podesta, weeks before WikiLeaks began releasing thousands of Podesta’s emails. Stone denies having any advance knowledge of the Podesta leaks.

The email in question:

 

“I sleep well at night because I know what I have and have not done,” Stone told CNN. “There’s no inappropriate activity pertaining to Russian collusion. I obtained nothing from WikiLeaks or Julian Assange. I never passed anything on to WikiLeaks or Julian Assange.”

But Wall Street reports: Roger Stone Sought Information on Clinton From Assange, Emails Show

Former Trump campaign adviser Roger Stone privately sought information he considered damaging to Hillary Clinton from WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange during the 2016 presidential campaign, according to emails reviewed by The Wall Street Journal.

The emails could raise new questions about Mr. Stone’s testimony before the House Intelligence Committee in September, in which he said he “merely wanted confirmation” from an acquaintance that Mr. Assange had information about Mrs. Clinton, according to a portion of the transcript…

The rest is behind a pay wall, but more here: The email Roger Stone didn’t want anyone to see

Emails obtained by the Wall Street Journal indicate that longtime Trump adviser Roger Stone withheld key documents from the House Intelligence Committee — documents indicating he lied about his communications with a radio host he hoped would serve as a backchannel to WikiLeaks during the 2016 campaign.

According to the Journal, in a message sent on September 18, 2016, Stone wrote to Randy Credico, a New York radio personality who interviewed WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange several weeks earlier, and asked him to:

“Please ask Assange for any State or HRC e-mail from August 10 to August 30–particularly on August 20, 2011.”

That email, which indicates Stone sought help colluding with a website that the U.S. intelligence community has accused of laundering emails stolen by Russian hackers, contradicts Stone’s September 2017 testimony to the House Intelligence Committee that he “merely wanted confirmation” from Credico that Assange had information about Clinton. It also contradicts statements Stone has made on his Facebook page and website about how his communications with Credico about Wikileaks merely “asked Randy to confirm that the Australian journalist had credible information on Hillary Clinton’s campaign.”

The Journal details Credico’s response, which suggests that he had asked Assange for favors on Stone’s behalf on previous occasions.

Wall Street Journal:

Mr. Credico initially responded to Mr. Stone that what he was requesting would be on WikiLeaks’ website if it existed, according to an email reviewed by the Journal. Mr. Stone, the emails show, replied: “Why do we assume WikiLeaks has released everything they have ???”

In another email, Mr. Credico then asked Mr. Stone to give him a “little bit of time,” saying he thought Mr. Assange might appear on his radio show the next day.

A few hours later, Mr. Credico wrote: “That batch probably coming out in the next drop…I can’t ask them favors every other day .I asked one of his lawyers…they have major legal headaches riggt now..relax.”

About two weeks later Stone tweeted:

That raised suspicions about what he knew, how he knew it, and how this might be linked to the Trump campaign.

The campaign against Clinton by Wikileaks deserves more attention too.

A tangled web that may or may not be unravelled by the Mueller investigation.

 

The Assange contradiction

Today’s ODT editorial No ‘get out of jail free’ card yet  points out the contradiction between what Julian Assange campaigns for through Wikileaks – transparency – and how he holed himself up in the Ecuadorian Embassy for seven years to avoid facing responsibilities.

Seven years have done little to diminish the defiance (arrogance?) of Australian Julian Assange.

Many revere whistle-blowers such as Mr Assange. They support WikiLeaks’ goals of freedom of speech to improve transparency and reduce corruption – the same goals espoused by media organisations worldwide. Opinions differ, however, on WikiLeaks’ methods: a reliance on secret sources and leaked material, which governments have argued might put their countries and servicemen and women at risk.

The reverence of Assange diminished somewhat when he avoid facing rape accusations, and when Wikileaks campaigned against Hillary Clinton in last year’s US election.

This newspaper finds the most difficult thing to marry is Mr Assange’s professional crusade for transparency with his refusal to be held to account personally. The allegations are of a serious criminal nature. He maintains his sexual connection with the women was consensual. If he is innocent (and everyone should be assumed innocent until proven guilty) he had nothing to fear from simple questioning. If he was charged as a result, a trial in Sweden would surely have been fair and transparent and in the media spotlight.

When it comes to the “human rights” quoted by Mr Assange, there are still two women whose rights have been denied. This self-professed defender of truth and justice has sent a disturbing message to rape victims and perpetrators of sexual violence: run away and you won’t be held to account.

While he argues he has been unfairly detained, and his children deprived of a father, he could, in fact, leave the embassy at any time and start facing reality. The two former WikiLeaks volunteers had to, as did the supplier of his organisation’s best cache of information.

Assange quotes some UN agency that claimed he was illegally detained, but Assange chose to hide from Swedish justice in the Ecuadorian Embassy, and he chose to stay there to avoid that and other legal challenges.

Assange claims he was innocent of rape charges, but chose not to defend himself in the normal judicial process.

Wikileaks don’t seem to care about accusations they promote against others that avoid normal due process and justice.

Assange’s (and Wikileaks’) methods and political motives, and his supposed holding to account of authorities and politicians while going to extremes to avoid being held to account himself, is a contradiction that seriously diminishes the credibility of Wikileaks.

 

Sweden drops charges against Assange

Sweden has dropped the charges against Julian Assange relating to allegations made seven years ago.

Stuff: Julian Assange all smiles after seven-year rape investigation is dropped

Sweden has dropped its investigation into a rape allegation against WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange, who says he won’t forgive or forget the slandering of his name following an “important victory”.

The country’s Director of Public Prosecutions, Marianne Ny, made the announcement in Stockholm on Friday.

“Chief Prosecutor Marianne Ny has today decided to discontinue the preliminary investigation regarding suspected rape concerning Julian Assange,” the prosecutors’ office said in a statement.

Ny said it was “not possible to take any further steps that would move the investigation forward”.

“All prospects of pursuing the investigation are now exhausted,” she said. “It is no longer proportionate to maintain the arrest of Julian Assange in his absence.

“To continue with legal proceedings would require Julian Assange’s personal appearance in court. There is no longer any reason to continue with the investigation.”​

Assange, 45, who has been in Ecuador’s London embassy since 2012, where he was granted political asylum, tweeted a smiling image of himself after the news broke.

In February last year, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention said Assange was in effect being arbitrarily detained against international law.

He wasn’t detained, I thought he chose to live in the Ecudorian Embassy to avoid facing the investigation.

So that is now over for Assange, but it may not be the end of his problems.

‘REAL RISK’ OF ARREST, EXTRADITION

​Swedish prosecutors interviewed Assange at the embassy last November and in mid-March received a full translation of the interview, which they have since been reviewing.

In May, Assange’s lawyers asked the Stockholm District Court to review the detention order and arrest warrant against him.

They argued that the US had expressed they were seeking his extradition to the US over alleged crimes relating to Wikileaks’ publication of classified documents.

Assange’s lawyer Per Samuelson said Assange faced a “real risk” of extradition from Sweden. He argued his client’s remand status should be changed so he could leave the embassy to travel to Ecuador.

He is limited to where he can travel in the world to avoid the possibility of extradition proceedings.

However Assange is not likely to celebrate by immediately leaving the Ecuadorian embassy in London as he would still be arrested.

In a tweet, Wikileaks said the “focus now moves to the UK”.

US attorney general Jeff Sessions has said arresting Assange was “a priority”, over alleged crimes relating to Wikileaks’ publication of classified documents.

London’s Metropolitan Police Service, which has been staking out the embassy for five years, said there was still an outstanding warrant for Assange’s arrest in the UK for skipping bail. Wikileaks claimed the UK would arrest Assange “regardless”.

He may not find it easy to get out of Britain.

Melinda Taylor, a member of Assange’s legal team, said their next step was to push for the US to “clarify” Assange’s legal status.

“Their prosecution has been going on since at least 2010, that’s a hell of a long time,” she said. “He has been deprived of the ability to defend himself.”

His lawyers would approach the Department of Justice in the US and request that they either confirm their decision to seek Assange’s extradition, or drop the case altogether, she said.

Assange argues that he and Wikileaks are protected under freedom of speech laws, so he has no case to answer in the US.

Asked if Assange would consider agreeing to extradition to fight the case conventionally in the US courts, Taylor said Assange had already indicated earlier this year that he would do so “if he could rely on standard due process protections and assert a public interest defence”

Assange’s lawyers will also call on the UK to drop the outstanding arrest warrant against him.

They have a potential legal avenue: to approach the courts arguing that the Swedish decision constitutes a significant change in circumstances that means the warrant should be reviewed.

 

Assange extradition – not

The Hill: Assange lawyer: Manning commutation doesn’t meet extradition offer’s conditions

The attorney for Julian Assange said President Obama’s commutation of Chelsea Manning’s sentence does not meet the conditions of the WikiLeaks head’s offer to be extradited to the United States if Manning were pardoned.

Obama on Tuesday commuted Manning’s sentence for leaking classified information to WikiLeaks, leading many to wonder whether that meant Assange was ready to surrender to the Department of Justice.

“Mr. Assange welcomes the announcement that Ms. Manning’s sentence will be reduced and she will be released in May, but this is well short of what he sought,” said Barry Pollack, Assange’s U.S.-based attorney, via email.

“Mr. Assange had called for Chelsea Manning to receive clemency and be released immediately.”

Assange has not been publicly charged with a crime in the United States, but his legal team believes he may be charged “under seal,” where charges are kept secret to prevent a suspect from preparing an escape.

Assange first offered in September to trade extradition to the U.S. for a pardon for Manning. He reiterated the claim as recently as last week on Twitter.

“If Obama grants Manning clemency Assange will agree to US extradition despite clear unconstitutionality of DoJ case,” tweeted WikiLeaks’s official account on Thursday.

I doubt this will surprise many people.

 

Bizarre Trump-Russia-Assange situation

President-elect Donald trump is in a bizarre situation, appearing to support (via Twitter) Russia, WikiLeaks and Julian Assange and appearing to ridicule the US intelligence community.  Some believe this is at least in part an attempt by Trump to try and legitimise his election victory.

Amongst others Republican senators Lindsey Graham and John McCain have expressed concerns, and Director of National Intelligence James Clapper appears to have rebuked Trump.

Politico: Trump sides with Assange, Russia over U.S. intelligence

Ahead of his briefing on allegations of Russia election-season hacking, Trump mocks the intelligence community.

President-elect Donald Trump is freshly questioning U.S. intelligence assessments of election-season hacking, appearing to side instead with WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and Russia in comments that are rattling the American spy world as well as many of his fellow Republicans.

The billionaire real estate mogul late Tuesday and early Wednesday used Twitter to once again cast doubt on intelligence community deductions that Russian government-affiliated entities tried to tip November’s election in Trump’s favor.

In one tweet, Trump expressed suspicion about a supposed delay in an intelligence briefing he was due to receive about the suspected Russian interference.

“The ‘Intelligence’ briefing on so-called ‘Russian hacking’ was delayed until Friday, perhaps more time needed to build a case. Very strange!” Trump tweeted.

A U.S. official immediately fired back, insisting the briefing had always been set for Friday.

In a separate tweet, Trump noted that Assange has “said Russians did not give him” leaked emails from the DNC and other prominent U.S. political leaders. Trump also pointed out that Assange, who is holed up in Ecuador’s Embassy in London to avoid sex assault charges in Sweden, said “a 14 year old” could have been the hacker. It was a remarkable vote of confidence in Assange considering that Trump, according to newly uncovered material by CNN, called WikiLeaks “disgraceful” in 2010 and suggested its actions should face the “death penalty or something.”

Trump is deeply averse to the notion that his victory on Nov. 8 was tainted.

He appears to be putting his own ego ahead of his country’s intelligence agencies. Cross party criticism is growing.

Politico: Democrats, intel chief lament Trump’s ‘disparagement’ of spies

Minority members on the Senate Armed Services Committee turned Congress’ first hearing on Russia’s alleged election hacks into a platform to strike at the billionaire businessman and try to drive a wedge between him and GOP leadership — with even South Carolina Republican Lindsey Graham joining in the criticism.

Even Director of National Intelligence James Clapper seemed to implicitly rebuke Trump’s ongoing refusal to believe the government’s assessment that senior Moscow officials orchestrated a cyber campaign that roiled the Democratic Party in last year’s election.

“I think there’s a difference between skepticism and disparagement,” said Clapper, who leaves office on Jan. 20, in response to McCaskill’s speech.

Later, Clapper — who strongly defended the government’s assessment that Moscow directed the election-season hacks — told Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) that Trump’s rhetoric about intelligence agencies is alarming American allies.

“I do think that public trust and confidence in the intelligence community is crucial,” he said. “And I’ve received many expressions of concern from foreign counterparts about, you know, the disparagement of the U.S. intelligence community, or I should say what has been interpreted as disparagement of the intelligence community.”

Trump has repeatedly accused the intelligence officials hawking false narratives in an attempt to undermine his incoming administration. Most recently, Trump cited as evidence WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange’s repeated insistence that his organization did not receive the emails from the Russian government.

Clapper and NSA chief Adm. Michael Rogers also denounced Assange at Thursday’s hearing, when McCain asked if “any credibility” should be “attached to this individual,” given WikiLeaks’ record of leaking materials that put U.S. lives “in direct danger.”

“Not in my view,” Clapper replied.

“I’d second those comments,” Rogers answered.

Graham later crossed the aisle to join the Democrats in their condemnation, addressing his remarks directly to Trump.

“What I don’t want you to do is undermine those who are serving our nation in this area until you’re absolutely certain they need to be undermined,” Graham said.

Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John McCain (R-Ariz.) insisted that he trusted Clapper and the intelligence community to carry out the election-season hacking review and brief lawmakers on its findings.

Senior Republicans concerned at Trump’s siding with Russia and Assange, and supporting their own intelligence.

And it appears that there are differences over Russia in the team Trump is putting together.

Politico: Trump’s team tries to stifle rift on Russia

A war is brewing among Donald Trump’s advisers over how to deal with Russia and Vladimir Putin — and his team is trying to keep it from breaking out into the open.

As the president-elect’s top national security picks prepare to testify before Congress starting next week, his transition team is plotting ways to prevent a public spectacle that airs their most wildly divergent assessments of the threat Russia poses, according to two members of the Trump camp directly involved in the deliberations.

A war is brewing among Donald Trump’s advisers over how to deal with Russia and Vladimir Putin — and his team is trying to keep it from breaking out into the open.

As the president-elect’s top national security picks prepare to testify before Congress starting next week, his transition team is plotting ways to prevent a public spectacle that airs their most wildly divergent assessments of the threat Russia poses, according to two members of the Trump camp directly involved in the deliberations.

And Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), tapped to head the CIA, has said the U.S. response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014 has been “far too weak.”

I wonder how quickly Trump will learn that owning and running a company is much different than being President.

Paul Ryan: Assange a ‘sycophant for Russia’

The Republicans will dominate all of the presidency, the Senate and Congress in the new term, but the way the year has started suggests it may not be unbridled power – the horses seem to be hitched and pulling in different directions.

There was an attempt to slash oversight of Congress, followed by a Trump frowning via Twitter a rapid u-turn – see The Swamp fights back.

Now Paul Ryan calls Julian Assange a ‘sycophant for Russia’.

Mr. Assange reiterated this week in an interview with Fox News’ Sean Hannity that Russia was not the source behind the internal communications from Democratic officials that WikiLeaks released during the campaign.

In a series of Wednesday morning tweets, President-elect Donald Trump touted Mr. Assange’s recent testimony and questioned why Democratic officials were so “careless” with their communications.

But…

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan on Wednesday told radio host Hugh Hewitt that he really has no opinion on Mr. Assange, “other than I think the guy is a sycophant for Russia.”

Also:

@Evan_McMullin
.@SpeakerRyan on Julian Assange: “He leaks. He steals data and compromises national security.”

All Press Corps eyes will probably be atwitter and atrump.

 

Assange denies influencing election: yeah, right

Politico reports that Julian Assange has denied trying to influence the outcome of the US election.

The email jar must be just about empty, and crumbs are all over Assanges face. Plus jam. Plus egg.

Assange denies WikiLeaks trying to influence election outcome

WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on Tuesday defended the group’s decision to post troves of Democratic documents during the height of the election season, saying a moral imperative drove them to do so.

“This is not due to a personal desire to influence the outcome of the election,” he wrote in a 1,000 word statement posted as Americans streamed to the polls on Election Day. “The Democratic and Republican candidates have both expressed hostility towards whistleblowers … Publishing is what we do. To withhold the publication of such information until after the election would have been to favour one of the candidates above the public’s right to know.”

Yeah, right.

There may be public interest in illegally hacked emails.

But drip feeding them throughout the last months of the US campaign is clearly aimed at influencing the election, and using the election to get attention.

If it was important enough and justified to make emails public they would have been made public when they were available, not drip fed through the campaign.

Assange and Wikileaks have lost a lot of credibility and support through this exercise. He has made himself no better than his target, Hillary Clinton, and no better than the person he may enable, Donald Trump.

If Trump wins I expect a lot more disappointment will be directed at Assange in particular.

Power corrupts, and WikiLeaks has been absolutely been corrupted in trying to manipulate the US election.

Pilger interview with Assange

RT has video and a transcript of the John Pilger interview with Julian Assange.

  • ‘Clinton made FBI look weak, now there is anger’

“The FBI is always trying to demonstrate that no-one can resist us.  But Hillary Clinton very conspicuously resisted the FBI’s investigation, so there’s anger within the FBI because it made the FBI look weak. ”

  • ‘Russian government not the source of Clinton leaks’

“Hilary Clinton stated multiple times, falsely, that seventeen U.S. intelligence agencies had assessed that Russia was the source of our publications. That is false; we can say that the Russian government is not the source. ”

  • ‘Saudi Arabia & Qatar funding ISIS and Clinton’

“There’s an early 2014 email from Hillary Clinton, not so long after she left the State Department, to her campaign manager John Podesta that states ISIL is funded by the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar.  Now this is the most significant email in the whole collection, and perhaps because Saudi and Qatari money is spread all over the Clinton Foundation.”

  • ‘Clinton has been eaten alive by her ambition’

“I see someone who is eaten alive by their ambitions,  tormented literally to the point where they become sick; they faint as a result of [the reaction] to their ambitions.”

That’s an odd claim.

“She’s a centralising cog. You’ve got a lot of different gears in operation from the big banks like Goldman Sachs and major elements of Wall Street, and Intelligence and people in the State Department and the Saudis.”

  • ‘Libya is Hillary Clinton’s war’

“Who was the person championing it?  Hillary Clinton.  That’s documented throughout her emails.She perceived the removal of Gaddafi and the overthrow of the Libyan state — something that she would use in her run-up to the general election for President.”

  • ‘Trump won’t be permitted to win’

“Why do I say that?  Because he’s had every establishment off side; Trump doesn’t have one establishment, maybe with the exception of the Evangelicals, if you can call them an establishment, but banks, intelligence [agencies], arms companies… big foreign money … are all united behind Hillary Clinton, and the media as well, media owners and even journalists themselves.”

But he is in the race in a closely contested election. It’s not about permission of ‘the establishment, it’s about permission of a majority of voters (via electoral college votes).

  • Do you yourself take a view of the U.S. election?  Do you have a preference for Clinton or Trump?

” …he so clearly — through his words and actions and the type of people that turn up at his rallies — represents people who are not the middle, not the upper middle educated class, there is a fear of seeming to be associated in any way with them, a social fear that lowers the class status of anyone who can be accused of somehow assisting Trump in any way, including any criticism of Hillary Clinton. If you look at how the middle class gains its economic and social power, that makes absolute sense.”

An indirect answer that appears to be anti ‘the middle class’.

  • ‘US attempting to squeeze WikiLeaks through my refugee status’

“Now there’s undercover police and there are robot surveillance cameras of various kinds — so that there has been quite a serious conflict right here in the heart of London between Ecuador, a country of sixteen million people, and the United Kingdom, and the Americans who have been helping on the side.”

“[It means] that [they] are trying to get at a publishing organisation; [they] try and prevent it from publishing true information that is of intense interest to the American people and others about an election.”

  • ‘I am innocent and in arbitrary detention’

“[So it’s] me and the U.N. verses Sweden and the U.K.  Who’s right?  The U.N. made a conclusion that I am being arbitrarily detained illegally, deprived of my freedom and that what has occurred has not occurred within the laws that the United Kingdom and Sweden, and that [those countries] must obey. It is an illegal abuse. ”

“Here we have a case, the Swedish case, where I have never been charged with a crime, where I have already been cleared [by the Stockholm prosecutor] and found to be innocent, where the woman herself said that the police made it up, where the United Nations formally said the whole thing is illegal, where the State of Ecuador also investigated and found that I should be given asylum.”

RT: Assange: Clinton is a cog for Goldman Sachs & the Saudis (JOHN PILGER EXCLUSIVE VIDEO & TRANSCRIPT)