CNN Kinda Sorta Implies That Julian Assange Was a Russian Agent

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

CNN has a big story today about WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and his seven years spent living in the Ecuadorian embassy. Apparently the Ecuadorians became suspicious of Assange fairly quickly and kept him under regular surveillance. The CNN reporters got hold of a report that Ecuador commissioned from UC Global, a private Spanish security company, and notes over and over in its story that Assange interacted frequently with Russian agents.

But I think we’ve known that for a long time. The question is whether or not Assange knew they were Russians. The CNN piece has exactly one sentence about that:

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.

Well, sure, there’s no doubt that “there is evidence,” but how strong is the evidence? What is it based on? Is UC Global’s analysis trustworthy? I would be entirely unsurprised if Assange knew who he was dealing with all along, but there’s nothing much here to demonstrate that. At the very least, I’d like to see some of the context around those six words. This is a mighty big accusation to hang on a mighty small excerpt.

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We've never been very good at being conservative.

And usually, that serves us well in doing the ambitious, hard-hitting journalism that you turn to Mother Jones for. But it also means we can't afford to come up short when it comes to scratching together the funds it takes to keep our team firing on all cylinders, and the truth is, we finished our budgeting cycle on June 30 about $100,000 short of our online goal.

This is no time to come up short. It's time to fight like hell, as our namesake would tell us to do, for a democracy where minority rule cannot impose an extreme agenda, where facts matter, and where accountability has a chance at the polls and in the press. If you value our reporting and you can right now, please help us dig out of the $100,000 hole we're starting our new budgeting cycle in with an always-needed and always-appreciated donation today.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate