For Part 1, click here
More Feed for Idiotised Publics
Some of the most "august" platforms in Western media are joining the choir to hurl obscene insults at Julian Assange, from child molestation to smearing faeces on the [Ecuadorean] embassy walls.. The attempt by these scoundrels to smear his name and reputation has become literal, but also to be expected from the "gentlemen of the press", who so servilely shill for the interests and wishes of the global plutocracy. No fabrication is too disgusting for this crew of professional character assassins. When all is said an done, this is the true face of the global ruling class. In our first installment of this 2-part look at the Assange kidnapping and the reactions in the establishment camp (mostly straight hybrid war memes) and the responses by Assange's defenders, we focused on the latter. This is a sampler of the noises being made by those paid to support privilege and the crimes it requires to stay afloat.
Part 2. The Defamers
'Assange smeared faeces in Ecuador embassy,' says president - BBC News
Ecuadorian President Lenin Moreno has told the BBC why his government decided to revoke Julian Assange's asylum. The Wikileaks co-founder was arrested in London on 11 April after seven years in the Ecuadorian embassy. Mr Moreno accused Mr Assange of rubbing excrement on the embassy walls. Mr Assange's lawyer has accused Ecuador of "outrageous allegations".
2. Here's CNN, with the host eagerly making things easy for the Deep State to have its opinion on Assange transmitted to the clueless masses via former spook James Clapper, a certifiable perjurer (see sidebar below), now on CNN's payroll as a supposedly authoritative impartial commentator on geopolitical matters. The cesspool they call journalism in America cannot get more fetid than this. As we said elsewhere, very often the CIA does not need to infltrate or corrupt the media: it is the media.
Former intel chief reacts to Assange arrest
Published on Apr 11, 2019
3. Here's CBS, one of America's leading TV networks, repeating the same nonsense aired by the BBC—
Assange smeared feces on Ecuadorian embassy's walls, president says
Published on 17 Apr 2019
"He did not behave the way an asylee should, with respect for the country that has warmly welcomed him," Ecuador's President Lenin Moreno said. Note how all the media sing the same tune, acting like a huge echo chamber to impose their official narrative on the public's mind. It works almost every time. That's why, as reported yesterday by historian Eric Zuesse, 3-to-1 Americans favor Assange's rendition and punishment. You can also bet that 99% of these people hardly understand what is eally going on, nor how Assange's victimisation is their own.
4. A Spanish paper (El Pais) provides footage on Assange's living conditions, which is then re-interpreted by a treacherous Australian TV channel, which, mirroring the establishment's line, shows no sympathy for its compatriot. Notice further the way all of these media concentrate on what is—at best, assuming Assange's comportment was not that of an exemplary guest —annoying behaviour, but irrelevant to the legal and broader free speech issues defining a case which could end up in the rendition of Assange to a revenge-thirsty American deep state.
Security footage shows Julian Assange in his living quarters
Published on Apr 15, 2019
James Clapper's perjury, and why DC made men don't get charged for lying to Congress
Published Jan. 19, 2018
In DC, perjury is not simply tolerated, it is rewarded. In a city of made men and women, nothing says loyalty quite as much as lying under oath.
Former National Intelligence Director James Clapper is about celebrate one of the most important anniversaries of his life. March 13th will be the fifth anniversary of his commission of open perjury before the Senate Intelligence Committee. More importantly, it also happens to be when the statute of limitationsruns out — closing any possibility of prosecution for Clapper. As the clock runs out on the Clapper prosecution, Democrats like Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) have charged that Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen committed perjury when she insisted that she could not recall if President Donald Trump called Haiti and African countries a vulgar term. The fact is that perjury is not simply tolerated, it is rewarded, in Washington. In a city of made men and women, nothing says loyalty quite as much as lying under oath.
Even in a city with a notoriously fluid notion of truth, Clapper’s false testimony was a standout. Clapper appeared before the Senate to discuss surveillance programs in the midst of a controversy over warrantless surveillance of the American public. He was asked directly, “Does the NSA collect any type of data at all on millions, or hundreds of millions of Americans?” There was no ambiguity or confusion and Clapper responded, “No, sir. … Not wittingly.” That was a lie and Clapper knew it when he said it.
Later, Clapper said that his testimony was “the least untruthful” statement he could make. That would still make it a lie of course but Clapper is a made guy. While feigned shock and disgust, most Democratic leaders notably did not call for his prosecution. Soon Clapper was back testifying and former president Obama even put Clapper on a federal panel to review the very programs that he lied about in Congress. Clapper is now regularly appearing on cable shows which, for example, used Clapper’s word as proof that Trump was lying in saying that there was surveillance of Trump Tower carried out by President Barack Obama. CNN and other networks used Clapper’s assurance without ever mentioning that he previously lied about surveillance programs.
The expiration of the statute of limitations for Clapper will have the benefit of conclusively establishing that some people in this city are above the law. In a 2007 study, author P.J. Meitl found that “[a]lmost no one is prosecuted for lying to Congress.” Indeed, he found only six people convicted of perjury or related charges in relation to Congress, going back to the 1940s.
The problem is not that the perjury statute is never enforced. Rather it is enforced against people without allies in government. Thus, Roger Clemens was prosecuted for untrue statements before Congress. He was not given the option of giving the “least untruthful” answer.
Another reason for the lack of prosecutions is that the perjury process is effectively rigged to protect officials accused of perjury or contempt before Congress. When an official like Clapper or Nielsen is accused of lying to Congress, Congress first has to refer a case to federal prosecutors and then the administration makes the decision whether to prosecute its own officials for contempt or perjury. The result has almost uniformly been “declinations” to even submit such cases to a grand jury. Thus, when both Republicans and Democrats accused CIA officials of lying to Congress about the torture program implemented under former president George W. Bush, not a single indictment was issued.
For Clapper, the attempt to justify his immunity from prosecution has tied officials into knots. After Clapper lied before Congress and there was a public outcry, Clapper gave his “least untruthful answer” justification. When many continued to demand a prosecution, National Intelligence general counsel Robert Litt insisted that Clapper misunderstood the question. Still later, Litt offered a third rationalization: that Clapper merely forgot about the massive surveillance system. That’s right. Clapper forgot one of the largest surveillance (and unconstitutional) programs in the history of this country. Litt did not explain why Clapper himself said that he knowingly chose the “least untruthful answer.” Litt added, “It was perfectly clear that he had absolutely forgotten the existence of the ... program ... We all make mistakes.” Of course, this “mistake” was an alleged felony offense.
Clapper will establish a standard that will be hard to overcome in the future. He lied about a massive, unconstitutional surveillance program and then admitted that he made an “untruthful” statement. That would seem to satisfy the most particular prosecutor in submitting a case to a grand jury, but this is Washington.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University and a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.
The best way to get around the internet censors and make sure you see the stuff we publish is to subscribe to the mailing list for our website, which will get you an email notification for everything we publish.
THIS WORK IS LICENSED UNDER A Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Be sure to get the most unique history of the Russo-American conflict now spanning almost a century! The book that every American should read.