Investigation at Ecuadorian embassy confirms Assange met with Russians, coordinated election interference from embassy.

[The Romulan Republic]

https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/15/politics ... index.html

Atlanta (CNN)New documents obtained exclusively by CNN reveal that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange received in-person deliveries, potentially of hacked materials related to the 2016 US election, during a series of suspicious meetings at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London.

The documents build on the possibility, raised by special counsel Robert Mueller in his report on Russian meddling, that couriers brought hacked files to Assange at the embassy.

The surveillance reports also describe how Assange turned the embassy into a command center and orchestrated a series of damaging disclosures that rocked the 2016 presidential campaign in the United States.

Despite being confined to the embassy while seeking safe passage to Ecuador, Assange met with Russians and world-class hackers at critical moments, frequently for hours at a time. He also acquired powerful new computing and network hardware to facilitate data transfers just weeks before WikiLeaks received hacked materials from Russian operatives.

These stunning details come from hundreds of surveillance reports compiled for the Ecuadorian government by UC Global, a private Spanish security company, and obtained by CNN. They chronicle Assange's movements and provide an unprecedented window into his life at the embassy. They also add a new dimension to the Mueller report, which cataloged how WikiLeaks helped the Russians undermine the US election.

An Ecuadorian intelligence official told CNN that the surveillance reports are authentic.

The security logs noted that Assange personally managed some of the releases "directly from the embassy" where he lived for nearly seven years. After the election, the private security company prepared an assessment of Assange's allegiances. That report, which included open-source information, concluded there was "no doubt that there is evidence" that Assange had ties to Russian intelligence agencies.
UC Global did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Assange, a native of Australia, has always denied working for the Kremlin and has insisted that the source of the leaks "is not the Russian government and it is not a state party." He also said he would have published damaging information about then-candidate Donald Trump if he had received it.

The US announced criminal charges against Assange earlier this year for his role in the 2010 leaks of secret diplomatic cables and Pentagon war logs, which WikiLeaks got from then-US Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. British police yanked Assange from the embassy in April. He is now serving a one-year prison term in London for skipping bail in the UK, while aggressively fighting extradition to the US.

WikiLeaks did not respond to requests for comment. Assange's lawyers declined to comment. Assange maintains his innocence and WikiLeaks says the charges are "the worst attack on press freedom in our lifetime."

Assange sought refuge at the Ecuadorian Embassy in June 2012 to apply for political asylum and avoid extradition to Sweden, where he faced sexual assault allegations, which he denies.

The decision to offer Assange asylum was made by then-Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, who claimed he was protecting Assange from "political persecution." The asylum also served two larger purposes: It heightened Ecuador's status on the world stage and brandished Correa's credentials as a leading US antagonist in Latin America.

Initially the diplomats hoped to take Assange swiftly to Ecuador. But that plan stalled amid British refusals to allow Assange safe passage outside the embassy. So he settled in for a protracted stay.

Though confined to a few rooms inside the embassy, Assange was able to wield enormous authority over his situation. From the outset he demanded (and was granted) high-speed internet connectivity, phone service and regular access to professional visitors and personal guests. This arrangement enabled him to keep WikiLeaks active, the documents said.

Assange also issued a special list of people who were able to enter the embassy without showing identification or being searched by security. He was even granted the power to delete names from the visitor logs. To avoid surveillance cameras, Assange occasionally met guests inside the women's bathroom, according to the security reports.

This all leaves open the possibility that additional sensitive meetings took place but are still secret.

Quickly, the once-mundane diplomatic mission in the heart of London became a hotbed of tension and suspicion. Throughout Assange's stay at the embassy, Ecuador employed three security companies to conduct constant surveillance. Assange installed his own recording devices and used noise machines to stymie the snooping, according to the documents obtained by CNN.

The task of controlling Assange proved difficult. Fistfights broke out between Assange and the guards. He smeared feces on the walls out of anger.

Assange also maintained direct contact with senior officials in Ecuador, including former Foreign Minister Ricardo Patiño, and regularly used those connections to threaten embassy staff, according to the surveillance documents and two Ecuadorian government sources who spoke to CNN. He claimed he could get people fired, even the sitting ambassador.

Assange's authority appeared at times to rival that of the ambassador. In December 2013, Ambassador Juan Falconí wrote a letter to Assange and said that "you cannot give instructions contrary to mine."

CNN reached out to the four ambassadors who overlapped with Assange's time at the embassy. Only Falconí would comment, saying the Ecuadorian government had never pressured him to give Assange special treatment and that he had established rules for Assange to follow.

Several current and former Ecuadorian government officials, including Correa and Patiño, did not respond to multiple requests for comment. While Correa was in office, he responded to criticism over harboring Assange by doubling down on the asylum offer and holding Assange up as a symbol of Ecuador's commitment to freedom of the press.

Referring to Assange, Correa pointed out that "the icon of freedom of expression chooses to take refuge in the embassy of Ecuador," in a 2012 interview with RT en Español, a Spanish-language network controlled by the Kremlin. The Russian government operates television networks around the world to spread propaganda, and it reaches American audiences on its flagship English-language station, RT.

Despite the years of strife, Assange was allowed to stay and prepared to wield his power when the moment was right. That moment came in summer 2016, a pivotal time in the US presidential campaign.

By June, Trump and Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton had emerged as the de facto nominees of their parties and were gearing up for what would be a bruising general election. The campaign took a historic turn on June 14, when the Democratic National Committee announced that it had been hacked and blamed Russia -- which Trump dismissed as a farce.

Assange was busy back at the embassy. That month, members of the security team worked overtime to handle at least 75 visits to Assange, nearly double the monthly average of visits logged by the security company that year. He met Russian citizens and a hacker later flagged in the Mueller report as a potential courier for emails stolen from the Democrats.

Summer 2016: The releases begin
JUNE 14, 2016
Democratic National Committee announces it's been hacked and blames Russia.
JUNE 19, 2016
Assange asks the Ecuadorian embassy to beef up his Internet connection.
Embassy staff give Assange technical support "for data transmission," according to the surveillance reports, and help install new equipment.
JULY 6, 2016
WikiLeaks asks Russian hackers for materials about Clinton "because the (Democratic National Convention) is approaching and she will solidify bernie (Sanders) supporters behind her after."
JULY 14, 2016
Russian hackers send encrypted files to WikiLeaks, titled "big archive."
Assange meets for hours with German hackers Andrew Müller-Maguhn and Bernd Fix.
JULY 18, 2016
Republican National Convention kicks off in Cleveland.
At the embassy, an Ecuadorian security guard abandons his post to receive a package outside the embassy from a man in disguise.
WikiLeaks tells the Russian hackers they got the files.
JULY 22, 2016
WikiLeaks releases more than 20,000 internal files from the Democratic National Committee.

Sources: Surveillance logs obtained by CNN and the Mueller report.

Also in June, WikiLeaks secretly communicated with Russian hackers and Assange publicly announced plans to release new material about Clinton. The Mueller report says the Russian hackers obscured their identities by using online personas for all their communications with WikiLeaks, which included emails and direct messages to WikiLeaks' account on Twitter.

Assange took at least seven meetings that month with Russians and others with Kremlin ties, according to the visitor logs.

Two encounters were with a Russian national named Yana Maximova, who could not be reached for comment. Almost nothing is known about Maximova, making it difficult to discern why she visited the embassy at key moments in June 2016. During her two visits that month, she met with Assange in the middle of the day in the embassy's conference room.

Assange also had five meetings that month with senior staffers from RT, the Kremlin-controlled news organization.

US intelligence agencies have concluded that RT had "actively collaborated with WikiLeaks" in the past and played a significant role in Russia's effort to influence the 2016 election and help Trump win. For several months in 2012, Assange hosted a television show on RT.
In June 2016, RT's London bureau chief, Nikolay Bogachikhin, visited Assange twice, and gave him a USB drive on one occasion, according to the surveillance reports. That five-minute visit was hastily arranged and required last-minute approval from the Ecuadorian ambassador.

Nikolay Bogachikhin, London bureau chief for the Kremlin-controlled news outlet RT, visited Julian Assange at the embassy twice in June 2016, according to visitor logs obtained by CNN.

Nikolay Bogachikhin, London bureau chief for the Kremlin-controlled news outlet RT, visited Julian Assange at the embassy twice in June 2016, according to visitor logs obtained by CNN.

In an email to CNN, Bogachikhin said, "RT has produced multiple programming featuring Mr. Assange. Within that process, everything that is intrinsically involved in the production of content took place."

The RT bureau chief previously mocked reports about his visits with Assange, jokingly tweeting that he gave the WikiLeaks founder "a whole bag of Novichok," the chemical weapon used last year to poison a traitorous ex-Russian spy who lives in the UK. Since Bogachikhin's post last year, he has remained silent on Twitter.

Shortly after WikiLeaks established contact with the Russian online personas, Assange asked his hosts to beef up his internet connection. The embassy granted his request on June 19, providing him with technical support "for data transmission" and helping install new equipment, the documents said.

This was the same day Assange and his lawyers met with then-Ecuadorian Foreign Minister Guillaume Long, according to the surveillance reports. Long declined to comment for this story.

It's unclear whether Assange told the Ecuadorians that WikiLeaks was working behind the scenes to acquire documents related to the US election. The US government has never publicly accused Ecuador of knowingly helping Assange or the Kremlin.

As the election approached, security officials at the embassy noted that Assange released some of the hacked emails "directly from the embassy," according to the surveillance documents. The Mueller report explicitly referenced that "Assange had access to the internet from the Ecuadorian Embassy in London, England." The rest of that paragraph is heavily redacted.

It's unclear whether Mueller ever obtained these surveillance reports as part of his investigation.

Mueller concluded that hackers from Russia's military intelligence agency, known as the GRU, attacked Democratic targets in spring 2016 and removed hundreds of gigabytes of information. They created online personas -- Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks -- to transfer some of the files to WikiLeaks and publicly claim responsibility for the hacks, falsely disavowing any Russian ties.

Mueller's team noted that it "cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries who visited during the summer of 2016." Assange has said a small group of associates helped him from the outside, but only to sift through the emails.
The special counsel named one of those associates, German hacker Andrew Müller-Maguhn, and said he "may have assisted with the transfer of these stolen documents to WikiLeaks." The Mueller report appears to contain additional details about this possibility, but those portions were redacted because they contain classified information about sensitive investigative techniques.

Assange has known Müller-Maguhn for years. The hacker even showed up as a featured guest on Assange's short-lived television show on RT in 2012, discussing the future of the internet and digital privacy. Müller-Maguhn is also involved in mainstream technology groups, and served on the board of ICANN, the international organization that governs internet domains.

When contacted by CNN, Müller-Maguhn declined to comment about his meetings with Assange. He previously told The Washington Post that he was never in possession of the hacked materials before they were posted online.

Julian Assange meets with German hacker Andrew Müller-Maguhn at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The hacker visited Assange at least 12 times before the 2016 election. The special counsel report on Russian meddling named Müller-Maguhn as a potential courier of hacked emails to Assange.

Julian Assange meets with German hacker Andrew Müller-Maguhn at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. The hacker visited Assange at least 12 times before the 2016 election. The special counsel report on Russian meddling named Müller-Maguhn as a potential courier of hacked emails to Assange.

According to the surveillance reports, Müller-Maguhn visited Assange at the London embassy at least 12 times before the 2016 election. During a few of those meetings, Müller-Maguhn was accompanied by another well-known German hacker, Bernd Fix, the reports said. CNN was unable to reach Fix for comment.

The Mueller report says that on July 6, WikiLeaks reached out to the Russian online personas with a request to send anything "hillary related" as soon as possible, "because the (Democratic National Convention) is approaching and she will solidify bernie supporters behind her after," referring to her opponent in the Democratic primaries, Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

The trio of hackers -- Assange, Müller-Maguhn and Fix -- then gathered on July 14 for more than four hours on, according to the security logs. The special counsel's report indicates that on this date, Russian hackers posing as Guccifer 2.0 sent encrypted files to WikiLeaks, with the title "big archive."

Days later, on July 18, while the Republican National Convention kicked off in Cleveland, an embassy security guard broke protocol by abandoning his post to receive a package outside the embassy from a man in disguise. The man covered his face with a mask and sunglasses and was wearing a backpack, according to surveillance images obtained by CNN.

An Ecuadorian security guard, who abandoned his post, receives a package outside the embassy from a man in disguise on July 18, 2016. The man covered his face with a mask and sunglasses and was wearing a backpack.

An Ecuadorian security guard, who abandoned his post, receives a package outside the embassy from a man in disguise on July 18, 2016. The man covered his face with a mask and sunglasses and was wearing a backpack.

The security company saw this unfold on surveillance footage and recommended that the guard be replaced. But the Ecuadorian government kept him on the job.

On that same day, according to the Mueller report, WikiLeaks informed the Russian hackers that it had received the files and was preparing to release them soon. It's not clear if these incidents are related, and the contents of the package delivered to the embassy are unknown.

WikiLeaks released more than 20,000 files from the Democratic National Committee on July 22, and the emails exposed how top officials preferred Clinton and tried to undermine Sanders. The party's convention days later in Philadelphia dissolved into a chaotic mess. A week that had been designed to engineer party unity transformed into a near-mutiny and the DNC chair, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz of Florida, was forced to resign.

As Democrats tried to manage the fallout, Trump quickly upped the ante.

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing," he said on July 27, referring to Clinton's private server. Mueller said the Russians were listening after all, and tried for the first time to hack Clinton's office within hours of Trump's comment.

While Trump and Clinton crisscrossed the country in the final weeks of the campaign, the Russians ramped up their efforts, and Assange was toiling away on another major project.

Russian hackers, posing as DCLeaks, had reached out again to WikiLeaks and offered more materials, writing that "you won't be disappointed, I promise," according to the Mueller report. They later transmitted 50,000 emails stolen from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta's inbox.

The special counsel report pinpoints a potential date for the data transfer: September 19. On that day, Assange met again with Müller-Maguhn and the security guards observed Assange installing new computer cables in his room, according to the documents obtained by CNN.

WikiLeaks started releasing Podesta's emails on October 7 and released new batches nearly every day before the November election. The media covered all the embarrassing details, including transcripts of Clinton's closed-door Wall Street speeches, sniping from staffers about her "terrible" instincts and frustrations about overlap between business and charity, which they dubbed "Bill Clinton Inc."

Fall 2016: Chaos at the embassy
SEPTEMBER 15, 2016
Russian hackers reach out to WikiLeaks with questions about how to submit more materials.
They said, "I've got something that might interest you. You won't be disappointed, I promise."
SEPTEMBER 22, 2016
Russian hackers send encrypted message to WikiLeaks with subject line, "submission."
OCTOBER 7, 2016
WikiLeaks begins releasing 50,000 hacked emails belonging to Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta. (They released batches of new messages nearly every day until the election.)
The US government publicly blames Russia for hacking the DNC and meddling in the election.
WITHIN DAYS
The US warns Ecuador: Stop Assange or face the consequences.
OCTOBER 15, 2016
The embassy cuts off Assange's access to the Internet and telephone service.
OCTOBER 18, 2016
Assange gets into a heated argument with the Ecuadorian ambassador, who later bans any non-diplomatic visitors to the embassy.
Within an hour, the ambassador lifts the ban. Two WikiLeaks personnel show up at the embassy and remove computer equipment and about 100 hard drives.

Sources: Surveillance logs obtained by CNN, the Mueller report, and a former US official.

Trump touted the new leaks at nearly every stop on the campaign trail in the final weeks of the race, sometimes reading directly from emails and seizing on thinly sourced conspiracy theories.

"This just came out -- WikiLeaks! I love WikiLeaks," Trump said at a rally in Pennsylvania, a critical swing state that he carried by less than 1% of the 6.1 million votes cast statewide.

Kremlin-backed outlets, including RT, breathlessly amplified the leaks on social media. On at least two occasions, RT even published articles detailing the new batches of emails before WikiLeaks officially released them, suggesting that they were coordinating behind the scenes, which they deny.

Not long after the Podesta emails began trickling out, with the election fast approaching, the US government raised concerns with Ecuadorian officials that Assange was using their diplomatic mission in London to help the Russians interfere in the 2016 election, a former US official familiar with the matter told CNN.

The US protest came with an implicit warning: Stop Assange or there will be consequences for Ecuador, just like there would eventually be consequences for the Russians for meddling in the election, and for Assange too, according to the US official and documents obtained by CNN.

Facing this ultimatum, Ecuadorian officials in the capital city of Quito decided on October 15 to cut Assange off from the outside world, shutting down his internet access and telephone service. Even this didn't stop the deluge of email releases, which WikiLeaks continued pumping out every day until the election.

Ecuador soon released a public statement condemning WikiLeaks' involvement in efforts to interfere with the US election but reaffirmed its commitment to protecting Assange. As this geopolitical saga unfolded, the Ecuadorian Embassy received calls from other countries asking about potential US retribution and Assange's physical safety, the security reports said.

The situation intensified three days later. The security documents lay out a critical sequence of events on the night of October 18. Around 10 p.m., Assange got into a heated argument with then-Ecuadorian Ambassador Carlos Abad Ortiz. Just before midnight, Abad banned any non-diplomatic visitors to the embassy and left the building. Behind the scenes, Assange communicated with the foreign minister in Quito.
Within an hour of Abad's departure, he called the embassy and reversed the ban.

Associates of Julian Assange remove boxes covered by blankets from the embassy in the early hours of October 19, 2016. They also removed about 100 hard drives from the embassy, according to surveillance reports obtained by CNN.

Associates of Julian Assange remove boxes covered by blankets from the embassy in the early hours of October 19, 2016. They also removed about 100 hard drives from the embassy, according to surveillance reports obtained by CNN.

By 1 a.m., two WikiLeaks personnel arrived at the embassy and started removing computer equipment as well as a large box containing "about 100 hard drives," according to the documents.

Security officials on site wanted to examine the hard drives, but their hands were tied. The Assange associates who removed the boxes were on the special list of people who couldn't be searched. The security team sent a memo back to Quito raising red flags about this late-night maneuver and said it heightened their suspicions about Assange's intentions.

US intelligence agencies have said from the very beginning that WikiLeaks got the stolen emails from the Russian government, which Mueller also alleged in his indictment against a dozen Russian hackers. But the suspects are all living safely in Russia, so the US will likely never publicly produce a smoking gun or prove in court that Russia worked with WikiLeaks.

Trump was inaugurated in January 2017 and continued to question whether Russia had meddled in the election. Assange's internet access was restored after the election, and he continued to meet with hackers as well as an American lobbyist representing a prominent Russian oligarch.

In Ecuador, Correa's presidential term ended in May 2017 and he was succeeded by Lenín Moreno, a close ally who had been his vice president for more than six years. But after Moreno was elected, he quickly turned against Correa and started undoing many of his policies, including his friendly relationship with Assange.

Justice Department lawyers secretly prepared a criminal case against Assange for the Chelsea Manning leaks. Federal prosecutors even turned to a controversial law to target Assange for actively soliciting and publishing classified materials, which is typically protected under the First Amendment.

In April of this year, Moreno revoked Assange's asylum and said Assange had "violated the norm of not intervening in internal affairs of other states." This cleared the way for British police to forcibly remove Assange from the embassy when the first US charges were unsealed.

Assange hasn't been accused of any crimes related to his actions in 2016. He remains in a UK prison, awaiting what will likely be a grueling battle over his extradition to the US, where he could face spending the rest of his life in prison.

Meanwhile, he still has allies in Russia. Within hours of Assange's arrest, senior officials from President Vladimir Putin's government rushed to Assange's defense and slammed the US for infringing his rights, declaring that, "The hand of 'democracy' squeezes the throat of freedom."

CNN's Laura Weffer, Alfredo Meza and Evan Perez contributed to this report.
Timeline graphics by Tal Yellin. Illustration by Will Mullery.

But yeah, the Russians totally didn't interfere, and Assange is just a journalist and not a Russian intelligence asset.

[Elfdart]

And now for the real story:

To Attack Julian Assange, CNN Twists Embassy Surveillance Records That Were First Covered By Spanish Newspaper

Spanish newspaper EL PAÍS reported on July 9 that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange was spied on by a Spanish private defense and security firm called Undercover Global S.L., when he lived in the Ecuador embassy in the United Kingdom.

The report was based on “documents, video, and audio material” that was “used in an extortion attempt against Assange by several individuals.” In May, Spanish police arrested journalist José Martín Santos, who had a record of fraud, and a computer programmer for their alleged involvement in an “attempt to make €3 million from the sale of private material.”

Reporters for EL PAÍS found the spying on Assange’s legal defense meetings to be most significant. They were stunned by the fact that Assange felt he had to hold meetings in the women’s bathroom if he wanted to ensure privacy. And they took note of U.C. Global’s “feverish, obsessive vigilance” toward “the guest,” which became more intense after Lenin Moreno was elected president of Ecuador in May 2017.

That is not how CNN viewed the same cache of information compiled by the private security company and eventually used to allegedly extort Assange.

Although EL PAÍS makes no mention of meddling in the 2016 presidential election in its coverage, CNN approached the material like analysts at the CIA. They voraciously consumed logs hoping the documents would confirm Assange collaborated with Russian intelligence assets to release emails from John Podesta, Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman.

Compare the two reports, as they appeared on the news organization’s websites:




CNN was unable to find concrete proof, and the words “potentially” and “possibility” do heavy lifting for the media organization.

“New documents obtained exclusively by CNN reveal that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange received in-person deliveries, potentially of hacked materials related to the 2016 US election, during a series of suspicious meetings at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London,” the CNN report reads.

It adds, “The documents build on the possibility, raised by special counsel Robert Mueller in his report on Russian meddling, that couriers brought hacked files to Assange at the embassy.”

Yet, there is little to no evidence in the report to substantiate the conspiracy theory that CNN reporters want the public to believe.

Much of CNN’s report quotes from the Mueller report, not the private security company materials. It plugs in meetings and interactions Assange had with visitors that align with dates in the report in order to claim this appears to be evidence of collaboration with the Russian government, but CNN does not know what transpired.

For example, on July 18, 2016, CNN states, “While the Republican National Convention kicked off in Cleveland, an embassy security guard broke protocol by abandoning his post to receive a package outside the embassy from a man in disguise. The man covered his face with a mask and sunglasses and was wearing a backpack, according to surveillance images obtained by CNN.”

“WikiLeaks informed the Russian hackers that it had received the files and was preparing to release them soon. It’s not clear if these incidents are related, and the contents of the package delivered to the embassy are unknown,” CNN adds.

Nonetheless, hours after the report was published, CNN splashed the headline, “When Russia came knocking for Julian Assange” on their website, with a grainy but lurid frame from a surveillance camera that showed the Masked Man who made a delivery.

This is similar to when CNN went searching for a story about a Russian-funded digital media project called In The Now that produces viral videos. They wanted to show their work was aimed at “undermining American democracy.” When reporters could not find information to substantiate their state-identified suspicions, they manufactured a news story that involved giving Facebook a pretext for removing the project’s pages.

It also fits in with prior examples of malpractice, like when CNN jumped all over the false story that Assange met Paul Manafort, President Donald Trump’s campaign manager, at the embassy. In 2017, the network retracted a report when they falsely reported Trump aide Anthony Scaramucci was involved in a Russian hedge fund that the Senate was investigating.

Ecuador granted asylum to Assange in August 2012. The Ecuador government concluded Assange was a journalist, who faced the threat of persecution and would not receive a fair trial if was extradited. He also would likely suffer cruel and degrading treatment if he was sentenced to prison.

Since then, U.S. media organizations like CNN have refused to accept that Assange was a journalist targeted by the U.S. government. The ignorance of CNN reporters shows in the report.

CNN describes how Assange had “a special list of people who were able to enter the embassy without showing identification or being searched by security. He was even granted the power to delete names from the visitor logs.”

“From the outset he demanded (and was granted) high-speed internet connectivity, phone service and regular access to professional visitors and personal guests. This arrangement enabled him to keep WikiLeaks active, the documents said.”

Assange was not living in a prison cell, although he certainly suffered psychological trauma from his confinement in the embassy. He did not have restrictions like inmates. Of course, he was permitted to continue his work managing WikiLeaks and meeting with anyone who wanted to see him.

But if one reads CNN’s report, it is clear, like the CIA, they do not view the work Assange was doing as journalistic but rather the work of an “enemy” of the United States.

CNN reporters fixate on Andrew Müller-Maguhn’s visits to the embassy and a part of the Mueller report that referred to Andrew Müller-Maguhn, a German who met Assange through the Chaos Computer Club in 2007 and sits on the board of the Wau Holland Foundation.

“The Office cannot rule out that stolen documents were transferred to WikiLeaks through intermediaries, who visited during the summer of 2016,” the Mueller report stated. “For example, public reporting identified Andrew Müller-Maguhn as a WikiLeaks associate who may have assisted with the transfer of these stolen documents to WikiLeaks.”

Yet, the Mueller report’s citation was wildly misleading. The source for this example was a 2018 profile of Müller-Maguhn by journalist Ellen Nakashima published by the Washington Post (which CNN refers to in its report but does not bother to quote).

Müller-Maguhn told Nakashima it “would be insane” for him to hand deliver sensitive files, especially when the CIA has labeled WikiLeaks a “non-state hostile intelligence service.”

“How many of you wouldn’t be scared shitless by the head of the CIA declaring you the next target?” He characterized this allegation as a “lame attempt” by U.S. intelligence agencies to hurt the Wau Holland Foundation so they cut off their tax-free donations to WikiLeaks in Europe.

The materials that CNN and EL PAÍS examined show Müller-Maguhn visited Assange “at least 12 times before the 2016 election,” but the most CNN can report is that he “potentially” was a courier. They have no evidence for their claims that are largely dependent on coincidence and guilt by association.

EL PAÍS’ report details the intrusive surveillance that the firm was hired to perform. Such surveillance violated the protections Ecuador supposedly granted Assange as a political asylee.

“The security employees at the embassy had a daily job to do: to monitor Assange’s every move, record his conversations, and take note of his moods. The company’s drive to uncover their target’s most intimate secrets led the team to carry out a handwriting examination behind his back, which resulted in a six-page report,” according to EL PAÍS. “Company employees also took a feces sample from a baby’s diaper to check whether Assange and one of his most faithful collaborators were the child’s parents. This intelligence work had nothing to do with protection duties.”

CNN did not find the fact that company employees took a feces sample to be all that important. Instead, their mention of feces involved the scurrilous statement made by Moreno that he once “smeared feces on the walls out of anger.”

Allegations against Russia have been world news, but Russia is mentioned only once in EL PAÍS report.

“The recording equipment picked up on several secret plans drafted by Assange’s team to spirit him out of the embassy in disguise and take him to Russia or Cuba,” EL PAÍS describes. “The projects were never executed because the Australian-born activist refused, as he considered this solution ‘a defeat.'”

Former CIA officer John Kiriakou said, “The CNN report is deceptive and misleading. It takes old information, adds conjecture, and reaches conclusions that simply are not supported by facts. It’s not news. It’s unsupported opinion and entertainment.”

CNN management must keep churning out gossip pieces like this report on Assange because its ratings partly depend on sustaining the panic around Russia’s alleged influence. Although Mueller was unable to “establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government,” that does not matter to the news network.

Worse, the Trump administration indicted Assange for allegedly violating the Espionage Act when he published classified documents from Chelsea Manning that revealed war crimes, diplomatic misconduct, and other acts of political corruption. They launched a prosecution that could set a dangerous precedent that would greatly impact the ability of CNN to engage in newsgathering activities.

Such a precedent would not affect CNN when it produced intelligence agency propaganda like this story on Assange, but it could impede reporters if they dared to engage in journalism that challenged officials, particularly those involved in national security operations.

The El Pais article is HERE and it's fucking hilarious! The two best parts:

The security employees at the embassy had a daily job to do: to monitor Assange’s every move, record his conversations, and take note of his moods. The company’s drive to uncover their target’s most intimate secrets led the team to carry out a handwriting examination behind his back, which resulted in a six-page report. Company employees also took a feces sample from a baby’s diaper to check whether Assange and one of his most faithful collaborators were the child’s parents. This intelligence work had nothing to do with protection duties.

Such a crack gang of agents, no?

Another report dated January 21, 2017 says: “3.30pm-6.28pm. Pamela Anderson. They exchange information through notes. They take pictures inside the meeting room. The voice-distortion device is on at all times.”

Now I know the cynics out there are snickering, but this could be significant: Pamela Anderson is from Canada and Canada is just on the other side of the North Pole from...

RUSSIA!

[The Romulan Republic]

More vapid trolling, zero content. Next.

[Jub]

More vapid trolling, zero content. Next.

An article with highlighted quotes is more than you ever manage to muster when you're posting your hundredth article of the day.

Plus, a useless one-liner with zero attempts at a rebuttal... Fucking weak bruh.

------

My take is why the hell would Russia transfer this information in the most-watched place possible? Surely Assange wouldn't be their only WikiLeaks contact so that makes no sense. The simplest explanation is that notes were passed to give some measure of privacy to both men, the same goes for the concealing clothing worn by Assange's guest.

I guess the other explanation would have to be that Russia wanted to get caught for... reasons...

[The Romulan Republic]

More vapid trolling, zero content. Next.

An article with highlighted quotes is more than you ever manage to muster when you're posting your hundredth article of the day.

Plus, a useless one-liner with zero attempts at a rebuttal... Fucking weak bruh.

He gives nothing of substance, he gets nothing back. As to the content of my post, that would be the article, which I quoted in full, and which you are welcome to read if the effort does not strain your intellect too much.

------

My take is why the hell would Russia transfer this information in the most-watched place possible? Surely Assange wouldn't be their only WikiLeaks contact so that makes no sense. The simplest explanation is that notes were passed to give some measure of privacy to both men, the same goes for the concealing clothing worn by Assange's guest.

I guess the other explanation would have to be that Russia wanted to get caught for... reasons...

I won't speculate as to motive in this case, but I've noticed that a lot of Kremlin activities of late are quite obviously connected to them while maintaining just enough veneer of plausible deniability to create confusion. Its likely that Putin wants people to know that he's up to shit, even if not exactly what. It advertises how powerful he has made Russia, how powerful he is. Putin is a skilled propagandist, as evidenced by the fact that he's got millions of so-called progressives defending the virtue of his semi-theocratic, viciously homophobic militaristic oligarchy, and millions of nationalistic Americans turning a blind eye to his interference in their country's elections.

[Ralin]

So uh, not going to deny I just skimmed Elfdart's article or pretend I didn't mentally flag it as untrustworthy given who posted it, but when did tl;dr become a valid rebuttal here?

[The Romulan Republic]

So uh, not going to deny I just skimmed Elfdart's article or pretend I didn't mentally flag it as untrustworthy given who posted it, but when did tl;dr become a valid rebuttal here?

I'm... honestly not sure if this is directed at me or at him.

[loomer]

So uh, not going to deny I just skimmed Elfdart's article or pretend I didn't mentally flag it as untrustworthy given who posted it, but when did tl;dr become a valid rebuttal here?

I'm... honestly not sure if this is directed at me or at him.

Well, let's see. Elfdart posted a news article that rebutts yours, including a link to the full report and a particularly absurd extract from what the company was up to. You, in turn, posted a 'zero content!!'. Who the fuck do you think Ralin means, you vapid twit?

[The Romulan Republic]

Allow me to elaborate:

The focus of Elfdart's rebuttal seems to be trying to attack the personal credibility, image, and motives of the investigators. Note that this is not actually refuting any of the allegations regarding Assange- he's just trying to use smears to makes us believe that because the investigators are bad people, the accusations are therefore obviously false and require no further rebuttal. This is, in short, bog-standard ad hominem tactics.

Now, the character of the investigators is one factor to consider, certainly, when weighing the validity of their allegations. But there are others. For example, the fact that Ecuador has not denied (and that at least one official has reportedly confirmed) these allegations, as noted in my OP article. That would to me lend considerable weight to their credibility, since I assume that Ecuador would wish to deny that their embassy was used as a staging ground for an attack on the United States, is possible.

Of course, none of this matters, nor does any amount of documentation, evidence, or facts. All debate on this topic for the Putin/Assange apologist brigade boils down to arguing personal (or national) character. Facts and evidence have no place in the Post-Truth World.

That's why I don't want to engage with Elfdart's bullshit. Because I know from experience that he will not debate in good faith, and it'll be a cluster fuck whatever I do.

[Jub]

Allow me to elaborate:

The focus of Elfdart's rebuttal seems to be trying to attack the personal credibility, image, and motives of the investigators. Note that this is not actually refuting any of the allegations regarding Assange- he's just trying to use smears to makes us believe that because the investigators are bad people, the accusations are therefore obviously false and require no further rebuttal. This is, in short, bog-standard ad hominem tactics.

Now, the character of the investigators is one factor to consider, certainly, when weighing the validity of their allegations. But there are others. For example, the fact that Ecuador has not denied (and that at least one official has reportedly confirmed) these allegations, as noted in my OP article. That would to me lend considerable weight to their credibility, since I assume that Ecuador would wish to deny that their embassy was used as a staging ground for an attack on the United States, is possible.

Of course, none of this matters, nor does any amount of documentation, evidence, or facts. All debate on this topic for the Putin/Assange apologist brigade boils down to arguing personal (or national) character. Facts and evidence have no place in the Post-Truth World.

That's why I don't want to engage with Elfdart's bullshit. Because I know from experience that he will not debate in good faith, and it'll be a cluster fuck whatever I do.

Your article holds equally poor evidence such that you're taking a lack of formal public statements and a single off the record statement as proof for your already entrenched position on the matter. In cases where neither side has that much evidence to go on, likely because no side involved wants to publicly share just how much they know or don't know on this subject, we have to carefully examine everything we do have access to. This includes that reputation of the investigators as well as the possible motives of the side making the claims.

Do you deny that the past behaviors of these investigators make them seem less than above board?

Do you deny that CNN, and other media outlets, profit from ongoing reports about Russian links to the 2016 campaign?

[The Romulan Republic]

Allow me to elaborate:

The focus of Elfdart's rebuttal seems to be trying to attack the personal credibility, image, and motives of the investigators. Note that this is not actually refuting any of the allegations regarding Assange- he's just trying to use smears to makes us believe that because the investigators are bad people, the accusations are therefore obviously false and require no further rebuttal. This is, in short, bog-standard ad hominem tactics.

Now, the character of the investigators is one factor to consider, certainly, when weighing the validity of their allegations. But there are others. For example, the fact that Ecuador has not denied (and that at least one official has reportedly confirmed) these allegations, as noted in my OP article. That would to me lend considerable weight to their credibility, since I assume that Ecuador would wish to deny that their embassy was used as a staging ground for an attack on the United States, is possible.

Of course, none of this matters, nor does any amount of documentation, evidence, or facts. All debate on this topic for the Putin/Assange apologist brigade boils down to arguing personal (or national) character. Facts and evidence have no place in the Post-Truth World.

That's why I don't want to engage with Elfdart's bullshit. Because I know from experience that he will not debate in good faith, and it'll be a cluster fuck whatever I do.

Your article holds equally poor evidence such that you're taking a lack of formal public statements and a single off the record statement as proof for your already entrenched position on the matter. In cases where neither side has that much evidence to go on, likely because no side involved wants to publicly share just how much they know or don't know on this subject, we have to carefully examine everything we do have access to. This includes that reputation of the investigators as well as the possible motives of the side making the claims.

Do you deny that the past behaviors of these investigators make them seem less than above board?

If they're true, it might reflect poorly on their character and the ethics of their tactics, but it would not automatically invalidate the evidence by association. That's ad hominem.

Do you deny that CNN, and other media outlets, profit from ongoing reports about Russian links to the 2016 campaign?

They profit from every story they report on. Does that mean every story they report on is automatically false?

Hell, in the minds of "anti-establishment" Putinophile faux-progressives, it probably does (except when they happen to report on something the FPs agree with). But its just another ad hominem. "The media are big corporations! Therefore anything they say is false! No further evidence required!"

But frankly, a thinly-veiled insinuation that Russian interference is being made up by "the media" for profit, with no evidence beyond the insinuation itself, is the kind of argument I'd expect to find somewhere like Brietbart. Honestly, if they wanted to make up shit for profit, they'd get farther just running endless celebrity tabloid bullshit (which they've gotten pretty close to doing sometimes, actually- the fixation on an actual news story like Russiagate is a welcome change of pace).

Again: Collusion deniers debate on character and reputation, because they cannot debate on evidence.

[Jub]

If they're true, it might reflect poorly on their character and the ethics of their tactics, but it would not automatically invalidate the evidence by association. That's ad hominem.

Then show us their evidence. Otherwise, it's worth discussing in absence of any other way to judge their ability.

They profit from every story they report on. Does that mean every story they report on is automatically false?

Did I say that it was automatically false? I asked a pointed question to get you to do something that you don't do very often, see things from all sides and critically evaluate some of the more extreme points of your political views.

Hell, in the minds of "anti-establishment" Putinophile faux-progressives, it probably does (except when they happen to report on something the FPs agree with). But its just another ad hominem. "The media are big corporations! Therefore anything they say is false! No further evidence required!"

Nobody cares, there's no need to answer every question with a bought of proselytization.

But frankly, a thinly-veiled insinuation that Russian interference is being made up by "the media" for profit, with no evidence beyond the insinuation itself, is the kind of argument I'd expect to find somewhere like Brietbart. Honestly, if they wanted to make up shit for profit, they'd get farther just running endless celebrity tabloid bullshit (which they've gotten pretty close to doing sometimes, actually- the fixation on an actual news story like Russiagate is a welcome change of pace).

There's no need to make up anything. You can report exactly what happened, sprinkle in some 'expert opinion', and with the right spin, you have a story from a whole lot of nothing. You can't make up a large story this way but you can keep an old flame roaring easily if you do it at the right times. That's what I'm suggesting that CNN may be doing with this particular story.

No lies, but a slant on the truth to ensure they keep a juicy story as profitable as possible.

[Elfdart]

It's funny how CNN and our resident Bircher wannabe still promote the bogus story about Assange smearing his excrement on the walls (it's implied more than once) and fistfights with embassy guards. It's also claimed that Assange was under constant surveillance in the embassy. Yet not a single photograph or audio/video recording has surfaced showing any such thing. Even after he was expelled from the embassy, nothing. So, pending some real evidence, these claims are consigned to the bullshit file.

But what I don't find funny is TRR's fatuous term "Collusion deniers" -one that implies that alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 is somehow like the Holocaust, and that those who are skeptical that whatever Russia did three years ago was all that important in getting the Grand Orange Wizard elected are in some way like neo-Nazis who claim the Final Solution was a hoax. That's just sick.

[The Romulan Republic]

It's funny how CNN and our resident Bircher wannabe still promote the bogus story about Assange smearing his excrement on the walls (it's implied more than once) and fistfights with embassy guards. It's also claimed that Assange was under constant surveillance in the embassy. Yet not a single photograph or audio/video recording has surfaced showing any such thing. Even after he was expelled from the embassy, nothing. So, pending some real evidence, these claims are consigned to the bullshit file.

But what I don't find funny is TRR's fatuous term "Collusion deniers" -one that implies that alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 is somehow like the Holocaust, and that those who are skeptical that whatever Russia did three years ago was all that important in getting the Grand Orange Wizard elected are in some way like neo-Nazis who claim the Final Solution was a hoax. That's just sick.

Okay, you've just crossed the line.

First, you equate my views (I am a a progressive Democrat, democratic socialist, and advocate of global government) to those of the John Birch society (a notorious far Right anti-Communist (because Russia is still communist, donchaknow), anti-UN pro-Trump conspiracy theorist group). To say that this is libel is an understatement.

You then have the utter hypocritical gall to claim that I am implying collusion deniers (which seems a pretty factually apt term for people who deny collusion occurred) are equivalent to Holocaust Deniers/Nazis (although I think we both know that there is some overlap between the two groups).

Reported for lying and defamation.

[Ralin]

But what I don't find funny is TRR's fatuous term "Collusion deniers" -one that implies that alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 is somehow like the Holocaust, and that those who are skeptical that whatever Russia did three years ago was all that important in getting the Grand Orange Wizard elected are in some way like neo-Nazis who claim the Final Solution was a hoax. That's just sick.

Climate change denier, vaccine denier, AIDS denier...not exactly positive connotations, but you're reaching pretty hard if that's the first thing you jump to. Especially given the insults you toss out at the drop of a hat.

[Solauren]

More vapid trolling, zero content. Next.

Edit it to say 'Fake News', and that's the best Trump impression I've ever seen or read.

[Jub]

Edit it to say 'Fake News', and that's the best Trump impression I've ever seen or read.

There are a few parallels now that you mention it:

-I could picture Trump flaming people for quoting lines from famous plays at him while claiming to work in theater.
-He's an ignorant emotional child who ran for office with no real qualifications.
-TRRs polling numbers around here are bound to be positively Trump-like as well.

You nailed it in one.

[Elfdart]

But what I don't find funny is TRR's fatuous term "Collusion deniers" -one that implies that alleged Russian meddling in the 2016 is somehow like the Holocaust, and that those who are skeptical that whatever Russia did three years ago was all that important in getting the Grand Orange Wizard elected are in some way like neo-Nazis who claim the Final Solution was a hoax. That's just sick.

Climate change denier, vaccine denier, AIDS denier...not exactly positive connotations, but you're reaching pretty hard if that's the first thing you jump to. Especially given the insults you toss out at the drop of a hat.

Are you suggesting that if TRR wasn't trying to piggyback his cretinous "collusion deniers" epithet on the well-known label "Holocaust deniers", but was instead wanting to ride the coattails of normal people's righteous disgust for AIDS, vaccine or climate change denial that it's somehow not the ravings of a moral retard?

Here's a hint: AIDS, vaccines, climate change and the Final Solution are well-documented with real physical, tangible evidence to back them up. The notion that Russian dirty tricks had anything more than a marginal effect on getting Trump into the White House is not. Nor is the fucktarded idea that anyone who doubts Putin really is in control of the executive branch of the US government is a Putin fanboy. It's like some people's dim minds are trapped in 2002, when anyone and everyone who doubted the bullshit conspiracy theories about Iraq being behind the 9/11 attacks (among others) was somehow a Saddam Hussein groupie. It was bullshit then and it's bullshit now.

[loomer]

That's why I don't want to engage with Elfdart's bullshit. Because I know from experience that he will not debate in good faith, and it'll be a cluster fuck whatever I do.

So say that, you bloody twit. Don't write off the articles he posts as trolling with zero content. Be intellectually honest enough to admit that it isn't that the article is definitely just LIES AND SLANDER, but rather, you aren't willing to engage with the poster because of your personal history with them.

[Darth Yan]

Elfdart has dispayed repugnant behavior (downplaying that Assange very likely IS a rapist because he’s fond of the guy, or that Mueller did in fact conclude trump was guilty of obstruction of justice) in favor of his own views.

He also was reaching when he put Romulan on the same level as a holocaust denier.

[Solauren]

Why don't we all agree that TRR, Elfdart, and a few others, obviously have contrasting political views, and dislike each other, and just ignore them inside of N&P?

(I find both of them entertaining and insightful outside of N&P, but inside, they are both sounding like variants on Trump at this point).

[Elfdart]

Elfdart has dispayed repugnant behavior (downplaying that Assange very likely IS a rapist because he’s fond of the guy,

Stop lying.

or that Mueller did in fact conclude trump was guilty of obstruction of justice) in favor of his own views

Aside from trying to change the subject of this thread, what on earth are you babbling about?

He also was reaching when he put Romulan on the same level as a holocaust denier.

Have you lost the ability to read? TRR is the one who keeps likening "collusion deniers" (i.e. anyone who doesn't believe his pet conspiracy theory) to Holocaust deniers (or AIDS, global warming, vaccine deniers).

[The Romulan Republic]

Elfdart: It is not a lie to say that you downplayed the rape allegations against Assange, and that you suggested he should not face justice for those crimes. Would you like me to post quotes?

Also, got to love how you in one sentence feign bafflement at Darth Yan bringing up your views on the Mueller Report and Collusion and say its changing the topic, and then in the next line call Russian collusion (which is backed up by absolutely massive amounts of thoroughly documented evidence that I and others have repeatedly posted) my "pet conspiracy theory".

Christ, I remember when someone on this board could be banned for persistently ignoring evidence, lying, and then responding with personal attacks against those who called them on it.

Oh, and don't think I didn't notice the goalpost shift from "TRR is equating everyone who disagrees with him a Holocaust denier" to "TRR is equating everyone who disagrees with him to people who deny (insert lengthy list of things)", you miserable pustule on humanity's rectum.

But yeah, actually, I'd put collusion deniers in the same camp as climate change deniers or the most hard-line anti-vaxers, in that you are all denying the existence of an urgent threat backed up by massive amounts of evidence because it doesn't fit your ideological agenda. And in that you all overlap heavily with the Alt. Reich.

Why don't we all agree that TRR, Elfdart, and a few others, obviously have contrasting political views, and dislike each other, and just ignore them inside of N&P?

(I find both of them entertaining and insightful outside of N&P, but inside, they are both sounding like variants on Trump at this point).

Or you could actually read what we're saying and decide for yourself who's right and who's wrong, rather than just shrugging, saying "Both Sides are just as bad", and leaving it at that.

I also strongly object to you comparing my posts to Trump. I am not a white supremacist. I am not a xenophobe. I am not an advocate of despotism. I do not casually alter my views for the sake of self-aggrandizement. I've taken a lot of shit on this board for what I believe, and I've stood by it. And contrary to what some have alleged, I do not argue that anyone is treasonous simply for disagreeing with me. I do not try to incite violence against my critics (though I have been the target of comments that could be considered threatening on this board, sometimes with the acceptance and even participation of moderators). I have, however, been persistently smeared and libeled on this board, by Elfdart and a number of others, who have tried to equate me to a radical Right-winger, as well as a liar and troll generally. If your comments here are any indication, that smear is working. And if the consensus on this board is "TRR is a Right-wing extremist"- well, I would consider that self-evidently absurd, because it is literally the opposite of my views. But it would also make my participation on this board in any form untenable.

I also should not be the topic of this thread, just like I should not be the target of every other one of the dozens of other threads posters like Elfdart have successfully derailed by shifting the topic to attacks on whatever straw man of my personality and character they are peddling this week. Yet here we are, again. And I can assure you that no one is more sick of it than me, but there's no way out as long as people like Elfdart are allowed to behave like this with impunity. I shut up, they win. I argue back, they succeed in derailing the thread, they win. I report them, I have to do it every other week, and I end up getting accused of making malicious reports or "reporting everyone who disagrees with me".

This is why I have contacted the mods about Elfdart once again- because the persistent campaign of libel and smears by certain users against me on this board has an observable effect on how I am perceived, and how people react to my posts, on this board. And because it ultimately creates a situation where the only way to keep the peace on this board is to muzzle myself on the topics where I disagree with people like Elfdart. And I don't think that's fair. So I report him, in the (I admit probably vain) hope that this time, something will be done about it.

But I expect how this will actually end is that eventually they will provoke me into saying something I shouldn't, or enough people will get fed up with it enough to just decide that the easiest solution is to get rid of me, and I'll be banned, with the result that this forum will become a pro-Putin collusion denialist echo chamber (since I seem to be the only one who cares enough to regularly post on the topic). Which I expect is exactly what Elfdart wants.

[Solauren]

So, when Alec Baldwin does a good Trump impression, that makes him a racists?

I was illustrating how that was the kind of reply you can expect from Trump, and that you are either doing a brilliant satire of him, or rapidly proving 'don't fight with idiots, they'll drag you down to their level and beat you due to experience', true.

[Straha]

TRR, I say this with absolute sincerity. If this is your reaction to this thread maybe you should take a break from the board for your own mental well-being. Plenty of people over time from all levels of interaction (from the very casual to the absolutely most active at the literal top of the board) have talked about how this place takes a mental toll over time and can be deeply counter-productive to maintaining a happy life balance. If this place is causing you this much agita then stop engaging. You don't need that stress in your life.