The US Senate Intelligence Committee has asked Julian Assange to give evidence on what he knows about Russian influence in the US election – and the WikiLeaks editor is said to be “considering the offer”.
If he agrees, and the interview takes place, it is likely to focus on Assange’s role in publishing Democratic Party emails that were allegedly hacked by Russian military intelligence then passed on to WikiLeaks.
The excuse for the Democrats failure (ODT)
A note from Harry Cheadle writing for Vice in the lead up to the 2016 election is instructive in painting the picture that emerged from the DNC-Podesta trove released by WikiLeaks. The emails portrayed an “organization that is contemptuous of opposition, often obsessed with how an issue is perceived, and yet sometimes prone to decisions that seem self-defeating and dance on the knife edge of political disaster.” The chickens, notably of the socialist variety, are vengefully coming back to roost.
Scratching for ideas and options in ambushing President Donald Trump, it is clear that the senators have latched on to the next best thing: revoking the political status of a man with no internet access who will be arrested the moment he steps out of the embassy door. How fittingly democratic of them.
GREAT IDEAS in publishing are rare, but in 2006 Julian Assange came up with one.
Assange reasoned that the key structure that generated bad governance was conspiracy. To fight the conspiracies behind corrupt governments, he advocated a strategy to expose the conspirators and the conspiracies through a systematic use of leaks.
His subversive proposal was to build a website for whistleblowers where they could upload their information in safety and from where it could be collectively analysed by citizen journalists. The name he gave his whistleblower-enabling website was WikiLeaks.
In a bizarre coda to a surreal election, Trump and Assange join forces to show us how badly democracy is broken
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange goes public for the first time with his version of events surrounding a rape allegation made against him.
How long can Julian Assange stay in the Ecuadorian Embassy, and is his case unique?
The mainstream media has fallen in line with the governments of the UK and Sweden to dispute the legitimacy and significance of the decision by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention in favor of Julian Assange, but their claims don’t stack up.
The UK foreign secretary brands as “ridiculous” a UN panel’s ruling that Julian Assange be allowed to go free, but the Wikileaks founder demands the decision be respected.
A United Nations panel has officially concluded WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has been “arbitrarily detained” and should be allowed to walk free. Assange has been holed up in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London for more than three years. He wants to avoid extradition to Sweden over sex crimes allegations, which he has repeatedly denied and for which he has never been charged. He fears Sweden would extradite him to the United States, where he could face trial for WikiLeaks’ revelations. We air reaction to the U.N. decision from Assange and his attorney, Melinda Taylor, and speak with Mads Andenæs, U.N. special rapporteur on arbitrary detention.
Assange’s legal team says Britain’s international reputation is at risk if the country ignores the findings of a UN panel.
Britain said it rejects a UN panel ruling that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange is the victim of arbitrary detention at an embassy in London. Assange would still be extradited to Sweden if arrested in UK.