Tag: julian assange
Tucker Carlson Haunted By Defense Of Alleged Sex Trafficker Andrew Tate

Tucker Carlson Haunted By Defense Of Alleged Sex Trafficker Andrew Tate

Fox News' Tucker Carlson is facing scrutiny again amid the resurfacing of footage showing him defending kickboxer and YouTuber Andrew Tate, who was recently arrested on suspicion of organized crime, sex trafficking, and rape.

According to Mediaite, prosecutors indicated that Tate and his brother Tristan, in addition to two other suspects, “appear to have created an organized crime group with the purpose of recruiting, housing and exploiting women by forcing them to create pornographic content meant to be seen on specialized websites for a cost.”

A recent report from Reuters also noted that prosecutors said six women have indicated that they were sexually exploited by Tate and the other suspects.

Despite the damning reports, Carlson has publicly defended the kickboxer, and now footage of his remarks is circulating again. “Lots of mean things are being written about Andrew Tate but we have learned over time to trust our own experience,” the Fox host said. “Don’t believe what you hear, go straight to the source.”

During the segment, Carlson claimed he was “skeptical” of the allegations surrounding Tate, as he claimed the charges were similar to those made against Julian Assange.

“Why don’t they want you to hear from Andrew Tate?” Carlson said. “Do they really think that he’s a worse influence on the youth than, say, Cardi B? Tell us how.”

“They’re telling us he’s a criminal,” Carlson added. “Okay. Has he been charged? Who are the victims? What are their names?”

Carlson's remarks follow earlier highlights about Tate, when he explained how he became "rich."

“I’ve had over 75 girls work for me, and my business model is different than 99 percent of webcam studio owners,” he wrote. “Over 50 percent of my employees were actually my girlfriend at the time and, of all my girlfriends, NONE were in the adult entertainment industry before they met me.”

He also said, “I learned the most time-efficient way to meet girls, get them through the dating process, get them to bed, test if they’re a good girl or not, and begin the process of them falling deeper and deeper into love."

Reprinted with permission from Alternet.

Assange Says Trump Promised Pardon If He Cleared Russians

Assange Says Trump Promised Pardon If He Cleared Russians

Reprinted with permission from Alternet

President Donald Trump offered Julian Assange a pardon if he covered up Russia’s hacking of the DNC’s server, attorneys for the Wikileaks founder say, The Daily Beast reports.

Assange’s lawyers “said Dana Rohrabacher, a former Republican congressman, had brought the message to London from Trump.” The attorneys are arguing that Assange should not be extradited to the U.S., claiming the case was political and not criminal.

“Mr Rohrabacher going to see Mr Assange and saying, on instructions from the president, he was offering a pardon or some other way out, if Mr Assange… said Russia had nothing to do with the DNC leaks,” Edward Fitzgerald, Assange’s lawyer, told the court, relaying a statement produced by another Assange’s attorney.The case, however, is not political.

Assange, were he to be extradited to the U.S., reportedly could face 175 years in jail if charged and convicted on 18 charges including conspiracy to commit computer intrusion.

Rohrabacher, who claims he does not believe Russia interfered in the 2016 election, had earned the nickname “Putin’s favorite Congressman.”

The FBI in 2012 had to warn him the Kremlin considers him a valuable information asset – complete with a Russian code name.

In 2016 Republican House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, and other Republicans were speaking about Russia and Ukraine. McCarthy told the group, “There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump.”

Mueller Hits Trump Hard For Encouraging Wikileaks’ ‘Illegal Activities’

Mueller Hits Trump Hard For Encouraging Wikileaks’ ‘Illegal Activities’

Trump repeatedly said he ‘loves’ WikiLeaks. That’s a real problem to special counsel Robert Mueller.

Special counsel Robert Mueller had harsh words about Trump’s exuberant praise of WikiLeaks, the organization that illegally released emails from the 2016 Hillary Clinton campaign. During a Wednesday hearing with the House Intelligence Committee, Mueller called Trump’s actions “problematic.”

Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) noted during the hearing that Mike Pompeo, when he was director of the CIA, had assessed WikiLeaks as “a hostile intelligence service.” Mueller agreed with that view.

Quigley then read numerous statements by Trump, who frequently praised the outlet during the 2016 campaign.

“I love WikiLeaks,” he said. “This WikiLeaks stuff is unbelievable.” “Boy, I love reading those WikiLeaks.”

Quigley asked if those quotes disturbed Mueller and how he reacted to them.

“Problematic is an understatement,” Mueller replied, “in terms of what it displays and giving some hope or some boost to what is and should be illegal activity.”

Trump praised Wikileaks more than 140 times in the final month of the campaign.

After its founder Julian Assange was indicted in April of this year on federal charges, Trump tried to walk back his adoring praise, claiming, “I know nothing about WikiLeaks.”

During both the earlier Judiciary Committee hearing and the Intelligence hearing, Mueller has confirmed that the Trump campaign welcomed help from hostile entities like WikiLeaks, and even created campaign plans to maximize the impact of the illegal leaks.

Published with permission of The American Independent.

Is Julian Assange A Journalist? Does It Matter?

Is Julian Assange A Journalist? Does It Matter?

The day after the federal government indicted WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange on 18 charges related to his publication of secret Pentagon and State Department documents, San Francisco’s police chief apologized for raiding the home of freelance videographer Bryan Carmody because he had obtained a report he was not supposed to have. The two cases reveal widespread confusion about who counts as a journalist and whether it matters.

Declaring that Assange is “no journalist,” a Justice Department official assured reporters that the DOJ appreciates “the role of journalists in our democracy,” saying “it is not and has never been the department’s policy to target them for reporting.” Yet almost all of the federal felonies described in the Assange indictment involve obtaining and disclosing “national defense information” — crimes that reporters who cover national security routinely commit.

San Francisco police likewise questioned Carmody’s professional status in defending their May 10 search of his house, during which officers attacked his security gate with a sledgehammer and kept him handcuffed for six hours while they seized his equipment and records. Last week, Chief William Scott described Carmody as a “co-conspirator” in the “theft” of a leaked police report on the death of San Francisco Public Defender Jeff Adachi.

Three days later, responding to widespread criticism, Scott was singing a different tune. “I’m sorry that this happened,” he told the San Francisco Chronicle.

According to Scott, it was all a misunderstanding. “I am specifically concerned by a lack of due diligence by department investigators in seeking search warrants and appropriately addressing Mr. Carmody’s status as a member of the news media,” he said in a press release.

Scott mentioned California’s shield law, which applies to anyone “connected with or employed upon” a news organization and protects the confidentiality of journalists’ sources and unpublished information. “Department investigators” apparently understood that the shield law protected Chronicle crime reporter Evan Sernoffsky, whom they left unmolested even though he wrote articles based on information from the same leaked police report.

There is no federal shield law. But there is the First Amendment, which guarantees freedom of the press. Contrary to what the Justice Department wants us to believe, that freedom is not a special privilege that belongs only to officially recognized journalists. It applies to all of us when we use technologies of mass communication.

Assange views himself as a journalist and describes WikiLeaks as a “multi-national media organization.” Even if federal prosecutors disagree with that characterization, it does not matter: WikiLeaks has the same rights under the First Amendment as Fox News or The New York Times.

Yet in Assange’s case, we see the same double standard that was apparent in San Francisco. Although news organizations across the country and around the world published essentially the same information as WikiLeaks did, based on documents leaked by former Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, they are not in the dock — for now.

The Assange indictment emphasizes things he did that most investigative journalists do not do, such as publicly soliciting classified information, publishing unexpurgated documents that put informants at risk and (allegedly) offering to help a source break a government password. But except for one count, those details are not necessary elements of the charges against Assange, which is why journalists who make a living by reporting facts the government prefers to conceal are right to be worried about the precedent this case sets.

In its landmark 1971 Pentagon Papers decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the government could not constitutionally stop newspapers from publishing stories based on a secret history of the Vietnam War. But it did not resolve the question of whether they could be prosecuted after the fact.

That is the question posed by the Assange indictment, no matter how much the Justice Department wants to pretend otherwise. The answer will determine whether the government is the final arbiter of what we are allowed to know about what it does in our name.

Jacob Sullum is a senior editor at Reason magazine. Follow him on Twitter: @JacobSullum. To find out more about Sullum and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate webpage at www.creators.com.