What's In Store For Julian Assange

Julian Assange will be forced to "confess" falsely that Russia gave WikiLeaks the DNC emails in return for "leniency." Read on:

The U.S. and its foreign government stooges have victimized Julian Assange for the past decade. But their hunger to punish Assange is nowhere near sated yet.

With the seizure of Assange by the British police, the U.S.' clutches are inexorably closing around him. The smarmy and dishonest president of Ecuador, Lenin Moreno, who duped his predecessor Rafael Correa into helping him become president (Moreno has repaid the favor by bringing bogus criminal charges against Correa, forcing him into exile) made a corrupt bargain with the U.S. to obtain loans from the International Monetary Fund (which his poor population will have to pay back, with interest) and other secret favors to turn on Assange (who Correa granted asylum and Ecuadorean citizenship to), denouncing Assange publicly and calling in the British police to haul him into British captivity. (A yearlong campaign by the Moreno regime to make Assange's life as miserable as possible inside the Ecuadorean embassy in London, where Assange has been trapped by the British on orders of their U.S. masters for the last 7 years, failed to induce Assange to turn himself over to the tender mercies of the U.S.)

Thus the years-long nefarious scheme by the U.S. to dig its claws into Assange is reaching its goal. Who says the U.S. can't be patient?

Now, what does the U.S. want from Julian Assange? Besides silencing him and stopping the revelation of U.S. crimes by WikiLeaks? What does Assange have to "trade" to the U.S. in return for "leniency?"

"Cooperation." But what form would such "cooperation" take?

It is now established dogma in U.S. mythology that Russia "hacked" the computer of the Democratic National Committee (DNC), and engaged in "massive" "interference" with the 2016 U.S. presidential election, a sacrilege against Holy American Democracy. This is contemptibly laughable on numerous grounds, as well as factually false. The U.S. is a corporate oligarchy and bourgeois class dictatorship. The Congress is bought and paid for by these dominant economic players, and the Congress enacts laws to serve the interests of the very rich and large corporations. The elections themselves involve a lot of vote stealing and voter suppression and all manner of dirty tricks. The U.S. media and election officials connive to ensure that candidates from parties outside the two-party political cartel are marginalized to the maximum degree.  Billions were spent on manipulating the minds of the American people by the two oligarchical political parties and various shadowy organizations set up by rich plutocrats. Trump got billions in free air time from "the" media.

Other ways in which this canard is repulsive in its cynicism is the fact that the U.S. has intervened in other nations' elections AT LEAST 81 times since 1945- and in ways that were effective, unlike what Russia is said to have done. (Not to mention U.S. invasions, coups, and other forms of subversion to change governments it didn't like.) 

The DNC emails were released by WikiLeaks in July, 2016. In OCTOBER 2016, Clinton was ahead of Trump in the polls by 14%. In late October, FBI chief James Comey announced that emails related to the investigation of the private server Clinton used as Secretary of State under President Barack "The Drone Assassin" Obama were found on a device belonging to disgraced penis-texter Anthony Weiner. (It turned out they were merely copies of already-discovered emails, a big nothing.) That caused a big change in the polls, to between dead even and a 3.5% lead for Clinton (within the polling margin of error). Ultimately Clinton won by 2.9 million votes, so Trump became president because of the Electoral College. That's how it works in the self-proclaimed World's Greatest Democracy.

Thus did Russian steal the election for Trump.

But I did leave a few things out.  Russia spent $4,700 on all Google's platform's, including Youtube, according to the Congressional testimony of Google's CEO. And there was some drop-in-the-ocean Facebook activity by Russia, like pictures of Satan arm-wresting Jesus, and an anti-masturbation meme. This span and clickbait from a Russian troll farm was elevated into a devastatingly effective Russian election meddling operation by the unholy alliance of the Democratic Party, the corporate media, and the anti-Trump elements of the Deep State.

As to the factual basis for what has become a "fact" taken for granted- that Russia "hacked the DNC computer," there is none. There is only the assertion by the FBI and CIA that it did. There has never been any evidence provided. And in fact there is evidence conclusively proving that the assertion is false.

The DNC refused to allow any government agency to examine their computer. The FBI just took the DNC's word for it that "Russia hacked" it. Considering the accusation that a "hostile foreign power" committed a computer crime and "meddled" in a U.S. election, this is amazing. What kind of "investigation" is this? 

Tellingly, the NSA doesn't assert that Russia hacked it. The NSA is the only agency that, absent examining the computer server, could determine if Russia had intruded and downloaded data, because the NSA captures and stores all Internet traffic in the U.S. and most of that outside it.

Two retired career NSA veterans with years of technical expertise, William Binney and Kurt Wiebe, then analyzed the speed at which the DNC emails were downloaded, and found it would have been impossible to transfer them over the Internet at anywhere near the speed they were downloaded at. Rather it was the speed copying the emails to a flash drive plugged into the computer system.

Case closed. But there's even more. There's a likely person who did it.

Seth Rich was a young man who worked for the DNC. He was murdered in Washington, D.C. in what the police say was a "botched robbery." "Botched" because nothing was stolen from him. Not his cellphone, not his wallet, not his watch.

Two men shot him in the back a few steps from his home. No arrests have been made.

WikiLeaks put out a $25,000 reward on the case. Out of all the murders in the U.S., in the whole world, they offered a reward in just this one murder case. And in a Dutch television interview, Assange walked right up to the line of saying that Rich was the source of the DNC emails.

But you want me to believe, indeed demand I believe, that "Russia hacked the DNC's computer." And if I refuse to swallow your propaganda and go along with your hoax, that makes me a Russian agent and/or a kook.

Sorry, no sale. Go ahead and slander me.

Now, what about What's In Store For Julian Assange?

Julian Assange has repeatedly denied that WikiLeaks got the DNC emails from Russia. The "Mueller Report" repeats without evidence the FBI-CIA ASSERTION that Russia "hacked" the DNC server, and states that Assange LIED in denying this. Those are now Official Facts. Totally false, but unchallengeable "facts."

Here's something that surprised me, something that in days of blather now that the (censored) report has been released hasn't even been mentioned in "the" media:

The title of the "Mueller Report" is "Report On The Investigation Into Russian Interference In The 2016 Presidential Election."

Nothing about Trump or his campaign in that. So what has ended up as the target here?

Russia. As the table of contents, and the mass of Russian individuals named in the report, makes clear.

So it's obvious that both rival wings of the two-party political cartel, the Deep State, and most of the major media all agree on a Big Lie, "Russian election meddling." Something for which there is virtually no evidence.

Thus "evidence" would certainly be useful to them.

Given this political context, and the demented viciousness and relentless fanaticism of the U.S. power system, here's what I predict they're going to do to Julian Assange. They're going to offer him a choice. "Cooperate," and get a "light" sentence of "only" twenty years for the numerous charges they're gonna heap on his shoulders under draconian, repressive U.S. "law," or die in a U.S. "Supermax" prison, a psychological torture center designed to isolate political prisoners from the world.

"Cooperation" means not just betraying WikiLeaks internal structure and methods in detail, but most important politically, it means "confessing" to a lie, the Big Lie, that WikiLeaks got "hacked" emails "from Russia." And furthermore, we're gonna drag you into Grand Jury star chamber proceedings and Congressional hearings and maybe criminal trials and you're gonna degrade and humiliate yourself and lose the respect of your admirers and colleagues (you won't have any self-respect left) and make you lie and lie and lie about Russia and WikiLeaks, discredit the very organization you worked so hard to nurture, disgrace yourself and turn your back on your life's mission of speaking truth to power, in return we'll only make you live in a tiny cell by yourself, cut off from the world, for twenty years instead of for the rest of your life. (If you even survive longer than twenty years.)

What a choice.

Abandoned by the new, venal Ecuadorean government, by his homeland Australia, a lickspittle of a nation that can't get its tongue far enough up the asshole of the U.S. (or arsehole, if you prefer), an object of opprobrium in "Western" propaganda media, and target of relentless hatred by the U.S. imperialist power establishment, Assange's only allies are scattered dissidents, a handful of lawyers, and compromised "civil liberties" organizations that so far only weakly mewl tepid objections to this vicious repression.  (This means you, ACLU.) Absent an unexpected change in the correlation of forces (a useful term despite its "Marxist" "taint"), Assange's fate looks grim.

Assange helped reveal numerous crimes against humanity and corruption by numerous governments. It is a revealing commentary on the state of so-called "civilization" that the result isn't accolades, awards, and support for him and for WikiLeaks but an all-out attempt to crush him completely, silence him for life, and to destroy WikiLeaks.

I'm imagining the agony Julian's loving mother is going through right now. She made the "mistake" of raising an ethical son. That's something very dangerous to do in the "Free World."

Possibly the last photo we'll be allowed to see of Julian Assange for quite a while.

Wikipedia actually has a pretty good synopsis on Julian Assange, at least as of this writing before secret police agents sabotage it again. Just click on this bold text.

Trump's Flip-Flops on WikiLeaks

First he wanted Julian Assange to be executed. Then during his presidential campaign, after WikiLeaks published emails from the Democratic National Committee showing how the DNC rigged the primaries for Hillary Clinton and against Bernie Sanders (all the while pretending to be neutral), and the text of the revealing secret  speech Clinton gave to a Goldman Sachs conference in which she told them in effect Ignore what I tell the dumb rube voters, I'm really on your side. And high finance knows best how to be regulated, Trump publicly proclaimed "WikiLeaks! I love Wikileaks!" 141 times. [1]

Now that the U.S. has bribed the weak and corrupt Ecuadorean president Lenin "The Treacherous Weasel" Moreno to hand Assange over to the British for extradition to the U.S., Trump feigns ignorance of WikiLeaks.  "II  know nothing," he says, as if channeling Sergeant Hans Schultz from the old TV comedy Hogan's Heroes. [2]

Trump's fans are the same kind of cretins who enjoy Wrestlemania, a crude and vulgar theater of the absurd which Trump played himself in. His presidency is a Wrestlemania presidency, a regime of the most outlandish, outrageous  behavior. As in Wrestlemania, rules exist only to be violated in the most brazen and blatant ways.

Unfortunately politics and power is real life, not fantasy, and the Trump regime has been incredibly destructive and meted out misery to many. His loyal followers indeed are "deplorable," in fact they are despicable. They are fully morally responsible for his actions. His nature and plans were plain to see during a lengthy presidential campaign, during which he constantly directed racist vituperations at Hispanics, contradicted himself repeatedly, and told obvious, even ridiculous lies nonstop. Leftists should stop making excuses for those who voted for him. Contrary to their analysis, they had a progressive alternative if progressive policies were there goal- the Green Party. Which only got 2% of the popular vote. That truly is deplorable.

"No matter what I do or say, I always come up smelling like roses."

1] 141 times according to NPR correspondent Mara Liasson on the Brian Lehrer radio show, April 15, 2019.

2] Trump feigns ignorance of WikiLeaks. [video]

Notre-Dame Fire a Great Gift for Neoliberal French President Macron

This couldn't be better for Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron, he of the pretentious rich person's two middle names.

For five months now, the Yellow Vest street protest movement has been pressuring Macron and his regime, ripping the facade off his political scam, exposing deep fissures in French society, and revealing the simmering discontent under his neoliberal rule.

Now the fire at Notre-Dame de Paris cathedral, an iconic symbol of the French nation, will at least temporarily silence the protests as the nation unites as one. Rulers like nothing better than a populace in lockstep conformity. All dissent is for the time being squelched, something months of police violence, including blinding and maiming protesters and killing an elderly woman in her apartment from a supposedly errant police projectile, was unable to achieve. All will now "come together" in common cause, worshipping an old cathedral and watching the repair effort, an effort that will be led rhetorically and mediawise by- guess who?

So just as, in the immortal words of serial sex offender Leslie Moonves, Trump may be bad for America but he's great for CBS, so the cathedral fire may be bad for an old church and French pride, but it's great for one Macron.

Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frédéric Macron, President of the French Republic. 

Vive la Ruling Neoliberal Elite!

British Parliament Continues Its Two-Year Brexit Tantrum

After years of pressure led by nationalistic Tories, the reactionary British tabloids, and the so-called United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), the British government of then prime minister David Cameron, a Conservative (Tory) member, felt compelled to finally allow the public to vote in 2016 on a referendum on whether Britain should remain a member of the European Union (EU), or leave, so-called "Brexit," short for British Exit.

Much to the surprise and chagrin of much of the bourgeois establishment in Britain, Europe, and the U.S., Brexit won with 51.9% of the vote. [1]

I won't go into the whys and wherefors here as that's off the topic a bit.

Under EU law, Britain had two years to formally leave the EU. Now the deadline has arrived.

The British Parliament has in the past couple of weeks formally voted to reject remaining in the European Union, has voted to reject leaving the EU without an exit deal, AND has voted to reject the deal that took two years to negotiate and renegotiate.

In other words, the Members of Parliament (MPs) reject everything. They in effect reject BOTH leaving and remaining.

Why do I say the British MPs are having a tantrum over Brexit? Because, like two-year-olds, they are demanding something they obviously can't have, and won't stop demanding it. Namely, that Britain can have a better deal outside of the EU than as a member!

That is completely, totally unrealistic.

But they refuse to accept that.

The British Brexiteers want all the benefits of EU membership with none of the responsibilities or obligations or costs. It would be suicidal for the EU to agree to such a ridiculous demand, as it would create a cascade of other member states demanding the same treatment for themselves.

The Tantrumeers believe that, contrary to the old saw, that they CAN "have your cake and eat it too," as one of the main leaders of the Brexit movement, the Tory buffoon and dodgy former "journalist" Boris "Bojo The Clown" Johnson actually asserted.

Perhaps they imagine they are still a globally dominant power that can force others to accede to their unreasonable demands.

I have an idea. They've beaten the French and the Germans in past wars (with a LOT of help in the case of the Germans)- why not try THAT again?

Maybe that's what former Tory prime minister David Cameron meant when he threatened in the campaign leading up to the referendum on Brexit that voting to leave the EU would lead to "World War III."

Or maybe he was just being demagogic, like the pro-Brexit camp, which was even worse.

The EU leaders, whose exasperation has started to show, granted the British an extension to exit the Union, which by treaty was supposed to occur in two years, in March just ended, so the new deadline is in April. With the demand that since Britain is still in the Union, it must elect members to the toothless show legislature, the so-called "European Parliament." (In the past, the British members elected to that body were dominated by haters of that body, members of UKIP, led by the articulate and clever rascal Nigel Farage, the Trump-loving reactionary head of UKIP , who was their spokesman in the European Parliament in which role he delighted in making speeches on the floor insulting the body and the various EU poohbahs while they sat there taking it.

The current Tory prime minister, Theresa May, has proven to be a rigid and politically inept, indeed tone-deaf, politician. But the problem here isn't her incompetence. It is the total unrealism of Brexiteers, plus the fact that the Parliament is divided within itself in various ways, and both major parties, Labour and Conservative, are divided internally between pro-Brexiteers and Remainers, and within those subgroups in each party, those willing to take the deal on offer and those not, those wanting a "hard" exit with no deal and those who think that Britain can somehow extort a more favorable deal out of the EU at this late date,and among Remainers, those who favor a "do-over" of the referendum, and those who do not.

It's a mess, but those who will pay most of the cost are the British, as major corporations are already announcing plans to pick up and move to the continent. The imposition of border controls adds friction and costs to cross-border commerce, increasing prices.

Being able to keep out workers from the continent, and freedom from EU rules on health, safety, labor rights, pollution, product standards, etc., in the name of "independence," won't really help the main supporters of Brexit, workers left behind by neoliberalism. Interdependence isn't necessarily bad.

Ironically, if Britain had a social welfare state more like some of those in Europe rather than a Thatcherite model, the referendum vote may have come out differently. People who are kicked to the curb sometimes find a way to upset the apple cart, or at least knock some of the apples off.

Theresa May, architect of the Grenfell Tower fire massacre.

Bojo The Clown

Nigel Farage. (Rhymes with "garage.") Happy now, huh asshole?

1] A detailed breakdown of the referendum vote is at the BBC here.