Assange’s Own Filmmakers Accuse the Faux Transparency Advocate of Censorship
Call it ‘radical transparency for thee and not to me.’ Actually ‘radical transparency’ was Comey’s explanation for that July press conference, to bring up another sore subject…
As we noted in earlier posts, this morning, the House Intelligence Committee wants to speak to the Trump campaign’s digital director, Brad Parscale. This is big as it touches on the underlying charge of Russia collusion.
The testimony of Parscale also totally implicates Jared Kushner who hired him and worked closely with him.
“The FBI’s wide-ranging criminal investigation into Russia’s meddling in the 2016 presidential election may include scrutiny of the Trump campaign’s San Antonio-based digital operation overseen by senior White House adviser Jared Kushner.”
“CNN reported that along with Kushner’s contacts with Russians and his relationship with fired national security adviser Michael Flynn, the FBI is looking at the campaign’s 2016 data analytics programs conducted largely out of San Antonio under the direction of local digital advertising executive Brad Parscale.”
To be sure, the Trump campaign strategy was not so much about expanding the map as shrinking it.
Despite all Trump’s recent quibbling ‘I’m not under investigation’-now he is-his campaign was always under investigation. So it’s highly notable that at the campaign itself they had a poster of Assange saying he missed reading Hillary Clinton’s classified emails.
“Parscale is one of the few within Trump’s crew entrusted to tweet on his behalf. He’s sitting at a long table in a double-wide trailer behind the debate arena, cheek to jowl with his fellow Trump staffers and Reince Priebus, chairman of the Republican National Committee. The charged atmosphere and rows of technicians staring raptly at giant TVs and computer screens call to mind NASA on launch day. On the wall, a poster of Julian Assange reads: “Dear Hillary, I miss reading your classified emails.”
Speaking of Julian Assange:
“We are the producers of Risk , a documentary film about Julian Assange and WikiLeaks.”
“We unequivocally defend WikiLeaks’ journalistic right to publish true and newsworthy information.”
“The Trump administration’s threats against WikiLeaks and attacks on press freedom are chilling. As Margaret Sullivan recently argued in the Washington Post, prosecuting WikiLeaks under the Espionage Act would set a dangerous precedent for all journalists.”
True, though, it’s becoming clearer that Assange is not the transparency advocate that he claims. And it’s interesting to me that despite the alleged threat by Trump’s CIA Director, Pompeo, Assange has continued to attack Hillary Clinton regularly. He doesn’t seem to be taking this presumed threat by the Trump WH very personally.
Trump broke his promise to appoint a Special Prosecutor for Hillary Clinton's clear obstruction. Now he has one himself. Irony or justice?
— Julian Assange (@JulianAssange) June 16, 2017
He tweets not like a transparency advocate but a Deplorable. This is not an unusual tweet of his by any means-you see stuff like this daily.
Then we have the fact that he leaked fake anti Macron documents during the Friday before the French election.
In any case, now the great transparency advocate doesn’t want his own documentary to go forward:
“We were disturbed, however, to learn that Julian Assange and WikiLeaks sent cease and desist letters to our distributors demanding they stop the release of Risk: “We therefore demand that you immediately cease the use and distribution of all images of the Named Participants and that you desist from this or any other infringement of the rights of the Named Participants in the future.”
“In WikiLeaks’ efforts to prevent the distribution of Risk , they are using the very tactics often used against them – legal threats, false security claims, underhanded personal attacks, misdirection – and with the same intentions: to suppress information and silence speech.”
Uh-of course! The fact that they seem surprised by this suggests they don’t know their own subject very well. Assange while demanding radical transparency for thee has always believed in ‘censorship for me.’
Many of the old guard at Wikileaks before 2010 have a story to tell about Assange and it’s not pretty.
Back to Newsweek:
“Since 2016, Assange and his lawyers have repeatedly demanded that we remove scenes from the film in which Assange speaks about the two women who made sexual assault allegations against him in 2010 and Sweden’s investigation which has since been discontinued.”
“In response to our refusal to remove these scenes, Assange and his lawyers are now claiming that Risk threatens the safety of the staff who consented to being filmed, and furthermore, that we are being sexist by including Assange’s own comments about women in the film.”
“WikiLeaks’ comments have consistently been about image management, including: demands to remove scenes from the film where Assange discusses sexual assault allegations against him; requests to remove images of alcohol bottles in the embassy because Ecuador is a Catholic country and it looks bad; requests to include mentions of WikiLeaks in the 2016 U.S. presidential debates; and, requests to add more scenes with attorney Amal Clooney because she makes WikiLeaks look good.”
Well he’s right there-Wikileaks certainly deserves a major part of the story of the 2016 POTUS debates.
Here’s the big question: will Assange’s back channel communications with Roger Stone make the cut? What about when Nigel Farage stumbled into his living room?
I have no idea how I ended up in Julian Assange’s apartment in the embassy.
P.S. So the Gravis poll against Peter King NY2 and it has good news-almost too good to believe.
In my March poll I trailed King by 11 and thought that was very good news. Now Gravis has me up by 10? Still, the moment of truth is next week when Gravis writes up the press release.
And-yes-I do need donations if I have any hope of bringing around the local party to seeing that I am the chance to break out of the party’s long losing streak against King.
Whether you live in NY 2 or across the country, you can donate. As yourself whether you cannot afford even $5 or $10 dollars.
There is nothing more important in getting answers to Trump-Russia collusion than a Democratic House in 2019. Peter King is on the House intelligence committee. I think we all know that he will never be any part of the solution for getting to the bottom of Trump Russia.
Please donate to help me in my part of the effort to fight for a Dem House.
We can have a Dem Congress, we must have a Dem Cogress, and we will.
Thank you. We must have a Dem House. And so, we will.