Assange's Game and The Atlantic's Fraud

Of course the previously linked Washington Post story regarding the Brazile revelations keeps changing, as indeed they will continue to 'update' the story. Such updates can themselves be a subject of study.

I wrote the Brazile post on 6 Nov and it's been sitting in my folder for almost two weeks. Already the story has faded and the current buzz is over Donald Trump Jr. and his contacts with Wikileaks.

Again, this is another case of spin. Assange contacted Trump Jr. seeking info about a website, engaged in a bit of self-promotion... hoping to drive Trump people to the website. And he baited him seeking information. One thing is clear from the exchange. Assange obviously thinks Trump Jr. is pretty dumb.

It was a bizarre mini-episode during the campaign as the Trump people briefly praised Wikileaks. Of course after taking office they excoriated Assange and Wikileaks and have now labeled them (Assange et al.) as enemies of the United States.

Of course the problem here is the reporting is all being done with a load of assumptions and unproved assertions laying the foundation. If one accepts the narrative, then yes, the exchange looks funny. If one doesn't accept the foundation, then the Assange-Trump Jr. exchange looks like, more or less nothing. Assange should have been more prudent (indeed he looks foolish and has harmed his credibility) but there's nothing here to suggest the grand plot that keeps being pushed by the Post, Times and the rest of the Establishment media. The media keeps repeating the Richard Blumenthal tweet suggesting Trump Jr. was actively engaged and coordinated strategy with a known agent of the Russian government.

This statement is guilty of begging the question. Blumenthal draws a connection between Trump Jr. and Russia because Jr. had a few exchanges with Wikileaks. But there's no evidence to suggest Assange is a Russian agent, therefore Blumenthal's statement is rendered non sequitir. The same is true of Adam Schiff's equally erroneous claims.

But for the media, it's pure gold.

Assange is under attack and yet his contacts with the Trump campaign will forever tar his reputation. He looks less like a persecuted martyr on the quest for truth and more like a scheming self-promoter. Regardless of his motives, I would probably mark this moment as the beginning of the end for him. His star is fading and it's got to be very lonely in the Ecuadorian embassy just now.

There were still a lot of people on the Left that were willing to praise him and stand by him. His actions in reaching out to the Trump campaign will break those ties of support. There are many on the Left that despise the Clintons and yet absolutely fear and detest Trump. Both were bad options but the fact that Assange even appears (whether actually so or not) to aid the Trump campaign would be for them... beyond the pale. I am reminded once again of the Greenwald-Klein discussion. To someone like Naomi Klein, Assange is a wrecker, a destroyer. She and many like her view his campaign as nihilistic and his turn to the Trumps... looks like he's abandoned all principle to force the door open and let the bulls into the china shop.... just for the sake of breaking things.

http://pilgrimunderground.blogspot.com/2016/12/wikileaks-greenwald-v-klein.html

Maybe that is or isn't the case, but regardless many a Leftist who still believes in reforming the system will find such behaviour reprehensible.

Assange will not come out of this unscathed and yet once again it's clear that most people don't have the whole story. Can we even figure it out at this point?

Caitlin Johnstone conclusively demonstrates the media is slandering Assange. The Atlantic piece which has generated quite a buzz over the past week is prima facie false, as she aptly demonstrates. Indeed, context is everything. They completely changed the meaning of Assange's statement. This alone ought to make one sit up. It's so blatant and egregious that it should make you wonder how many subtle instances of this are perpetrated on a daily basis... and yet completely missed by the average consumer of mainstream media?

https://medium.com/@caityjohnstone/the-atlantic-commits-malpractice-selectively-edits-to-smear-wikileaks-65ecd7c2468f

Make sure you scroll down and read the larger quote, and you'll see what Assange is doing. I think he's harmed himself in the game that he's playing, but it's clear, The Atlantic story is false.

For a fairly comprehensive and well-written account of the Anti-Russia campaign, which includes the Assange and DNC angles, I recommend the following two-part piece by Max Blumenthal.

https://www.alternet.org/grayzone-project/clint-watts-fake-russia-expert

One point (among many) that I took away from his piece was that the Neo-Conservatives have not gone away. They have morphed. This has been my sense for some time and Blumenthal helps to clarify this. One thing remains clear, their agenda while modified and re-packaged has been mainstreamed and now seems to almost dominate the centre of the US political spectrum. Russia and Iran are the targets and clearly there are those in the DNC and the larger Establishment that wish to use the Trump takedown as a springboard toward launching a larger series of wars.