Constitutional Law, Free Speech, Media

CNN Apologizes And Retracts Statement That Julian Assange Is A Pedophile After Threat Of Lawsuit

200px-Cnn.svg230px-Julian_Assange_20091117_Copenhagen_1_cropped_to_shouldersCNN has issued an apology after one of its on-air pundit called Julian Assange a Pedophile. Wikileaks threatened to sue for what would be clear defamation if untrue. However, that might not be the end of possible litigation. Another guest appears to have made the same allegation and the first pundit, Philip Mudd, a former CIA agent and CNN counterterrorism analyst, could still be sued in his own right.

Mudd stated on CNN “I think there’s an effort to protect WikiLeaks from a pedophile who lives in the Ecuadorean Embassy in London.” The statement has been part of an all out campaign against Assange. Many powerful people in Washington still deeply resent the role of Wikileaks in exposing secret surveillance. However, many are more angry at the disclosure of the dishonestly and duplicity of the Washington elite.

Mudd was not the only one suggesting that Assange is a pedophile. Mike Rogers, a CNN national security commentator appeared on “The Lead with Jake Tapper” and said that Trump was wrong to support a recent account of Assange on the Russian hacking allegations. He added that

[Trump needs] someone to explain to him who Julian Assange is . . . I think if he knew all of the details — this person is wanted for rape of a minor. He is hiding in the basement of an embassy because he is a fugitive from justice, number one. Number two, he has released information harmful to the United States that I do believe jeopardize soldiers in the field.

Assange is accused of rape in Sweden after having sex with two adult women in 2010. Even for an individual accused (but not convicted of) rape, such an allegation is clearly defamatory if untrue. The common law has long treated some types of states as raising per se claims where special damages or proof are unnecessary. These include 1. criminal offenses; 2. loathsome diseases; 3. matters incompatible with business, trade, profession, or office; and 4. Serious sexual misconduct. Pedophilia would clearly fall into such categories which are the basis for slander per se actions. This would be a libel action since, while spoken, television broadcasts are treated as libel with special damages do not need to be proven.

Potential tort liability may have influenced the decision of CNN in issuing its apology:

“An analyst on our air earlier today asserted that Julian Assange was a pedophile, and regrets saying it. In fact, CNN has no evidence to support that assertion.”

Of course, any defamation action would be complicated by the fact that Assange cannot leave the embassy in London due to the threat of arrest and deportation. However, there remains statements on CNN that could still sustain a legal action if Wikileaks and Assange are willing to not just litigate but do through what would be a curious discovery process.

74 thoughts on “CNN Apologizes And Retracts Statement That Julian Assange Is A Pedophile After Threat Of Lawsuit”

  1. The emails that I have read which come through Cloud 9 suggest that Assange is gay but not a pedophile.

  4. Turley is fudging the facts here,
    It is more likely the apology was a normal journalistic apology for getting a fact wrong. There is no possible chance Assange or Wikileaks- an anonymous bunch- could sue for libel as they would have to do so within 12 months.
    I expect Jonathan Turley to at least do normal journalistic investigations and not just accept Wikileak’s laughable press releases and Twitter posts.

  5. the Charter for CNN needs to be yanked from CNN by the FCC NOW…..the aholes occupying those ZIONIST SEATS at CNN are showing there pure contempt for the truth……HOW DARE CNN and the men and woman …who are all total WHORES and UNION members…..and the most deplorable ACTORS and being member of the UNION the AFTRA…..they all need to be fired…a massive boycott of CNN and all of the Advertisers who line the pockets of those total aholes needs to be stopped….NOW and oh by the way…..the HEAD of the FCC has taken an oath…..he is a Trustee of the Public.

    2635.101 Basic obligation of public service.
    (a) Public service is a public trust. Each employee has a responsibility to the United States Government and its citizens to place loyalty to the Constitution, laws and ethical principles above private gain. To ensure that every citizen can have complete confidence in the integrity of the Federal Government, each employee shall respect and adhere to the principles of ethical conduct set forth in this section, as well as the implementing standards contained in this part and in supplemental agency regulations.

    (b) General principles. The following general principles apply to every employee and may form the basis for the standards contained in this part. Where a situation is not covered by the standards set forth in this part, employees shall apply the principles set forth in this section in determining whether their conduct is proper.

    (1) Public service is a public trust, requiring employees to place loyalty to the Constitution, the laws and ethical principles above private gain.

    and under 63 C of Corpus Juris Secendum 2nd section 247…..makes it clear that all officers holding any office are trustee of the public.
    63C Am. Jur. 2d Public Officers and Employees Summary
    63C Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, §247
    “As expressed otherwise, the powers delegated to a public officer are held in trustfor the people and are to be exercised in behalf of the government or of all citizens who may need the intervention of the officer.
    [1]Furthermore, the view has been expressed that all public officers, within whatever branch and whatever level of government, and whatever be their private vocations, are trustees of the people,
    [2]and accordingly labor under every disability and prohibition imposed by law upon trustees relative to the making of personal financial gain from a discharge of their trusts…
    [3] and owes a fiduciary duty to the public…
    [4] It has been said that the fiduciary responsibilities of a public officer cannot be less than those of a private individual.
    [5] Furthermore, it has been stated that any enterprise undertaken by the public official who tends to weaken public confidence and undermine the sense of security for individual rights is against public policy. Fraud in its elementary common law sense of deceit-and this is one of the meanings that fraud bears [483 U. S. 372] in the statute.
    See United States v. Dial, 757 F.2d 163, 168 (7th Cir1985) includes the deliberate concealment of material information in a setting of fiduciary obligation. A public official is a fiduciary toward the public, … and if he deliberately conceals material information from them, he is guilty of fraud. McNally v United States 483 U.S. 350 (1987) [Emphasis added]

    and that is a quid pro que contractThe Oath of office is a quid pro quo contract cf [U.S. Const. Art. 6, Clauses 2 and 3, Davis Vs. Lawyers Surety Corporation., 459 S.W. 2nd. 655, 657., Tex. Civ. App.] in which clerks, officials, or officers of the government pledge to perform (Support and uphold the United States and state Constitutions) in return for substance (wages, perks, benefits). Proponents are subjected to the penalties and remedies for Breach of Contract, Conspiracy cf [Title 18 U.S.C., Sections 241, 242]. Treason under the Constitution at Article 3, Section 3., and Intrinsic Fraud cf [Auerbach v Samuels, 10 Utah 2nd. 152, 349 P. 2nd. 1112,1114. Alleghany Corp v Kirby., D.C.N.Y. 218 F. Supp. 164, 183., and Keeton Packing Co. v State., 437 S.W. 20, 28].

  7. If Julian Assange being accused of being a pedophile is a lie then he should sue the liar. But DDT gets elected to the Presidency on a platform of lies, exaggerations, and character assassinations; doesn’t he get to get sued as well? Clinton and the rest of the gang we call our leaders should be lined up and sued. However, the first spot belongs to DDT.

    1. No I would save that spot for people like you who are incapable of handling the truth OR teling l a decent lie; but then programmable clones – so far – haven’t reached that level of technologyl Staiy tune for tomorrows Clonespeak of the Day available six days a week and all different but Never On Sunday. That’s their day of repair.

    2. This is absurd.
      Stop being blinded by sim-information and hero worship of personalities.
      Assange cannot sue anyone as he is locked in an Embassy in London.
      He would have to travel to the USA to sue anyone and he has spoken repeatedly that the whole reason he is in that Embassy because he fears being sent to the USA by Sweden.

      1. Hey, Sam!

        Ever hear of ‘Power of Attorney”? Assange CAN sue anyone – without being present or having to travel to the USA or anywhere else. He is NOT “locked-up” anywhere. And, prisoners “locked-up” have sued prominently and successfully, often achieving positive prison reforms.

        [PS. I take NO position on Assange’s actions regarding his alleged unauthorized release of possibly confidential/classified intel, or any other actions, and my statement above should NOT be construed as legal advice]

        1. Those confidential etc classification laws apply only to US Citizens and within the areas of control of the USA. They don’t apply to Presidents and apparently to Secretaries of State.

          Secondly and in the same vein these idiotic comments by the press and media on interfering with elections never cite the Money As Free Speech laws. Even after going through a Supreme Court review they do NOT exclude foreign governments or other entities. Any citizen, business, or nation in the world has the right to invoke Money As Free Speech when it comes to the the USA election systems EXCEPT US citizens.

          What the two have in common is did they violate the laws of their home country including hacking?

          Ergo Sum Russia nor any other foreign source are clean as driven snow you stupid snowflakes of the media. You however do not have the right to publish classified information. It doesn’t come under free speech, money as free speech nor any other of the rights you helped to do away with . Personally where the lamestream media is concerned I recommend treating them as the interenal version of foreign agents AKA enemies domestic.

          But the laugh is a 14 year old from Europe may well have ruined Hillary’s day and those expecting her to have pardon capability. Those investigations are far from over. Bwa HA Ha ha haha

    3. Isaac, you point out yet another tragic result of the election.
      With the Clintons back in the White House, we’d know that we’d have had the paragons of honesty back in charge.

      1. Honestly you got to be kidding or have your head stuck in a collectice clone regurgitating pre programmed daily mantras. As for ‘honestly’ thats moral value. The left has no morals, values nor ethics. They aren’t allowed by their ruling class to their component interchangeable parts class.

        Why should we call the left stupid? Well maybe the ruling class just mentioned but the rest of them no not at all. It applies intelligence and the use of same. That isn’t allowed either. So get off their collective backs they cain’t hep it. They was born with a programmable computer chip in their haid.

  8. I’m trying to think of a definition of a CNN counter-terrorisim analyst. I envision some pointy head nerd with a wanna be complex who has never learned the trade up close, personal nor pulled a trigger. CNN was the first clue followed by NYT. The only thing more damning aganst the accuser would be ‘worked for the Obama State Department’. i’m on a rant today. Don’t expect Mr. Nice Guy.

  9. If Assange is guilty of espionage, so would be the NYTimes and other newspapers who have published whistleblower stuff.

    1. bettykath, remember the Wash Post who profitted off the Snowden revelations now thinks he should be prosecuted. MSM is disgusting.

    2. Innocent or guilty doesn’t excuse the lamestream media for whom a presumption of guilt is more likely and in view of their own administration changing probable cause and presumtion of innocence to ‘suspicion of.’

      Seems like the perps are biting themselves in the ass more and more these days. But then freedom of the press also means playing stupid when playing the fool.

      Simple terms. ‘enemies domestic.’

        1. Excellent! I’ll use my one word of the week anthropophagic since they clearly will not only eat their young but ours too. Just think of all the trees we would save if print media was banned and broadcast or cable TV limited in bandwidth. HA HA HA I’m not in favor of that except where ABC,CBS,CNN, NBC, the NYT, WaPo etc. are concerned. UNLESS they post a non redeemable security bond for their slanted garbage. The question is would a billion a year be sufficient. Note: The list is incomplete.

    3. Assange aided Snowden who stole US secrets, to flee to Russia. Snowden has lied about his history when it’s evident he had per-arranged his flight via Aeroflot to Russia without a passport. Snowden can be prosecuted as a traitor and Russian spy and Assange can be prosecuted under US law 9even though he is not American) for aiding a spy to flee/

  10. My God! What if they called him a pedophile priest? It is one thing to call someone a pedophile. But jeso, to call him a priest on top of it. Worse than a nun on the run with a bum.

    1. At quick glance, it reads more like an attack on free speech with some undetailed references to interfering. Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq I tell you!!

    2. Having read the document linked, it seems quite probable the administration is seeking to equate propaganda operations used by Russia as being tantamount to electioneering. The three or so references to “paid trolls” being operators of the Kremlin seemed almost a joke. Paid trolls are apparently a threat to the election system of the United States, according to this document. The document admitted that no election vote tallying systems were compromised. That certainly would be indicative of illegal influence, but going on and on about how Russia wanted someone that would be more like a friend and not be hostile toward their nation as being evidence of malfeasant influence, how is that so inconceivable?

      The document then goes on to show screen shots of political figures cast in a bad light. I should say, how long has this been going on in the world, perhaps since the invention the printing press?

      This whole thing is a joke. How many democratic governments have been overthrown by the United States over the years by means far worse than those alleged against the Russians today? Many at the very least.

      The worst offense was that if the Ruskies did in fact hack the DNC and expose the truth of the malfeasance, corruption and sleaze of Hillary Clinton and the Democrats they did the voters a favor in helping them decide their choice. What if a Democrat insider did the same thing, would the information be any less valid? Oh I forget, whistleblowers in general are to be destroyed by this administration no matter how altruistic they may be.

      1. That’s what I thought about it. It is laughable if the situation wasn’t dire. Plus, it has a poor diction for a official document. Maybe one of Obama’s kids wrote it.

        1. By kids you mean full time administration employees? Actual children are much more computer savvy these days.

      2. This whole thing is a joke. How many democratic governments have been overthrown by the United States over the years

        Just about none. The best example would be the removal of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954. The Arevalo-Arbenz regime was more of a political machine state like Mexico under the PRI rather than a constitutional state like Costa Rica, Uruguay, or Chile.

        1. You are excluding of course the USA under the secular regressive socialists. That was definitely an overthrow of a democratic government and predates Arbenz by four decades.

        2. A few others:

          Iranian Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953
          Congo’s Patrice Lumumba in 1960
          South Vietnam’s Ngo Dinh Diem in 1963 (though his original election was heavily tainted by election fraud)
          Brazil’s President Joao Goulart in 1964
          Chile’s Salvador Allende in 1973

      3. “This whole thing is a joke. How many democratic governments have been overthrown by the United States over the years by means far worse than those alleged against the Russians today? Many at the very least.” — Darren

        Indeed it is.

  13. The number of folks who believe CNN’s “reporters” and talking head expert idiots is shrinking. Clinton Newspeak Propaganda. Cultists angry that Assange exposed the DNC and it’s influence over the MSM. Blame the Russians, Wikileaks, etc. but nary a word about the CONTENT.

    1. Bingo. The tattletale gets reviled, but not the culprit. Where’s whistleblower protection when you need it?

      1. FFS – I’m sure you are aware that Obama has prosecuted (persecuted?) more whistle blowers than any other president.

  14. If Assange and wiki leaks has any dirt on CNN then they should release it. Turnabout is fair play. CNN stands for Crippled Northern Nannies.

  15. Steve – given the state of technology, Julian could appear electronically. We have had criminal cases where the defendants were put in rooms where they could see and hear the trial. We have witnesses testifying by video or digitally.

    This is just the DNC playing dirty tricks again. Julian does not need to be there for the depositions of the Clintion News Network. And he could be deposed in the Embassy. If I were CNN I would be on the phone to my insurance agent.

    1. Appear electronically? Only if some judge agreed. But don’t misunderstand me, falsely calling someone a pedophile is an evil and justifiably compensable act – slander per se. I think, however, CNN’s quick retraction and apology gets them out of the woods at summary judgment time. (Who was the on-air CNN person who said it anyway?)

      1. JW,

        I don’t know if you are aware of this but “trials” in Gitmo are conducted electronically with a delay in releasing what little of the tribunals are allowed, to be heard by reporters. These are fake trials, show trials of people who have been brutally tortured. For this reason, the govt. does not want any accurate statements of how detainees were tortured to enter into the public domain, hence the use of electronic delays. That’s the Obama system of “justice” at work.

        1. No, that’s the Bush-Cheenie way that Obama continued – but only one I believe, as he has pressed to get the obviously innocent out of there – against the NEOCON’s wishes. It was the NEOCONS who pushed legislation prohibiting bringing the bad guys to the US for trials – only one snuck in and he was convicted. That was the GOP Congress.

          1. Incorrect JW.

            Obama could have released the detainees on day one of his presidency. He could have ordered civilian trials on day one as well. His administration refused civilian trials long before Congress was involved in the process at all.

            You don’t get to have it both ways. Obama released people from Gitmo when he wanted to,if it suited his aims, without asking Congress. Congress was angry about it, but he still did it. It’s time to understand what type of person Obama really is. No more excuses. No more lies.

          2. In any case neocons is just another word for RINOs. All nothing more than the right wing of the LEFT.

  16. I would think any lawsuit is highly unlikely. How would Assange appear for trial? It’s too bad, though. People who say stuff like that need to be kicked in the pocketbook.

    1. I’m guessing that sometime after January 20, America will drop its case against him, stop pressuring Britain to seize him, and he will never be absconded with to Sweden to face his non-charges. He won’t need asylum any more, because the prospect of life in an American dungeon will have gone away, and he’ll be free to go home to Australia.

      The false sex charges have been artificially maintained in Sweden by American pressure, as a pretext to put Assange in custody so that he can be extradited to America–to punish him for forcing transparency on the US governemnt. He knows that he’d end up in the same torture-condition as Bradley Manning, if the Americans ever got their hands on him, so he lives in what is essentially house arrest, in someone else’s house.

      It would be nice if Trump could arrange it that we compensate him for the loss of freedom we have forced upon him for almost five years now, but that’s probably not possible.

  17. Chuck Todd on NBC news called Ferguson a Ghetto. That is defamation.
    CNN cannot casually call someone a pedophile. That is the worst defamation. Julian needs to sue CNN. Unless of course there is truth to the statement. If he does not sue then we will wonder.
    He should sue. Unless its true. And I am a poet and don’t know it.

  18. This is a completely untrue accusation and claim. If you go to wikileaks or McClatchy news, you will see the mcClatchy article concerning the origin of the accusation. It’s very interesting and clear that extremely connected and powerful people were behind the accusation. For example, for 8 days, the front company involved in the claim was registered with the UN. It takes drag to get that! It’s very interesting to see what happened in this case.

    Wikilekas also has articles written by third parties about his rape allegations.

    Here again we see the MSM throwing out information which they know is a lie. They may retract it later with much less care and emphasis than the original false accusation. CNN knows the truth yet it continues to put out fake newz to discredit Assange. For many people, in so doing, CNN only discredits itself.

    1. Shhhhhhhh…….. Never ever entertain the idea that the females could be telling the truth about the rape or rapes. That amounts to blasphemy.

      2. Goldie,

        If you believe the women involved you might be surprised to know what they actually said. It’s not what you imply at all.

        “Over the past year, new information has emerged that both women explicitly deny having been raped by Mr. Assange. In a statement to the UK Supreme Court, the prosecutor acknowledged that the complainants wished only to ask the police for advice about HIV tests, having discovered they’d had both had sex with Mr. Assange. (There has never been an allegation Mr. Assange has HIV.) Neither of the women wished to lodge a formal complaint.
        The woman of whom Mr. Assange is accused of the offence of “lesser rape” (a technical term in Swedish law) sent an SMS to a friend saying that she “did not want to accuse JA [of] anything” and “it was the police who made up the charges”. The other woman tweeted in 2013 that she had never been raped. Both women’s testimonies say that they consented to the sex. A senior prosecutor already dismissed the ’rape’ accusation, saying that there were no grounds for accusing Mr. Assange on this basis. But a third prosecutor, lobbied by a politician who was running for attorney general, took over the investigation and resurrected the accusations against Mr. Assange. Due to the great number of incorrect reports of, it is best to rely on primary source documents in this matter, which are on the internet and the UK Supreme Court “Agreed Statements of Facts” agreed to by the UK, the Swedish authoritiesm and Mr. Assange’s legal team. (See here and here.)”

        https://justice4assange.com

        1. Don’t be so quick to claim that powerful men are innocent whether it be Bill Clinton, Donald Trump or Assange. Just sayin……

          1. Goldie,

            I’m giving you information which you can verify on your own. These are the claims made by the women themselves. Evidently you dismiss what they say as it doesn’t fit your narrative.

            You forgot to mention someone above–Hillary Clinton. i hope you believe, as I do, the women who said Hillary Clinton threatened them if they dared go public with their story of being raped by Bill.

            1. Jill, “Goldie” is not interested in facts – don’t waste your time. IT works for Soros IMO

              1. Soros? Can’t you be a little more creative. Is not Soros always the default answer when a right ring troll does not like the message.

                2. The correct answer for a left winger is ‘we were only following orders’ there is no individual answer just regurgitation upon command. Beyond that there is no capability until the next day programming is put into effect by their ruling class. Therefore you cannot confront them directly. Thus the repeated demonstrations of duuuuhh.

          2. /Well Goldie we KNOW that Clinton WAS guilty of lying about his liasons with interns, and She proved it with his semen on her blue dress. He was charged with “Lying to Congress and the American people” and set to be impeached except HIS Democrats didn’t have the guts to vote FOR impeachment. What we also KNOW, is that Hillary-looking to preserve HER chances down the road for POTUS, “actually attacked the women Bill did attack First, by her ‘siccing detectives on them to try to find dirt on these women, and SILENCE THEM.”

            While running for office, Hillary said that “All victims of rape, should FIRST be believed……is THAT what SHE did to Bill’s Victims? Uh ……….NO.

            1. Good Memory except it started in Arkansas and continues to this day. The dress was purple and there was a DNA match . The impeachment portion (grand jury ) went all right and came up with a charge of lying under oath to a federal judge. among others. The second phase, the actual trial skipped all around the facts and presented salacious tidbits. I still think that part was rigged to give Clinton an out. During this last campaign the victims of Bill and Hillary Clinton ignored the victims sitting in the front row of the debates. The second one where Hillary was very quiet and didn’t say much and never acknowledged their presence. But the damagte was done. Conclusion Victimizing women is not the sole province of men Women can and do do victimize women the sad part is in one group in this country they can’t see past woman and recognize victimizer who with her fellow co-conspirators of the NOW chose bills cute butt over defending their sisters. And then had the gall and arrogance to play that woman card. A good portion of the vote therefore went to blocking Hillary with no a little amount of revenge for this ….not a woman but a thing that looks like one. Multiplied by the other areas of lies, deceit, etc etc etc. when they defended by charging the same a huge number of people no longer believed them – with good reason. Trump did not win Hillary and the secular regressives lost and well deserved it was but the true victims are perhaps still seeking justice. And so is the nation.

        2. Shhhhhhhh, Jill, don’t tell Goldie the facts – it messes up her mindset. FFS.

          1. FFS,

            It is frustrating when people simply ignore facts. It seems to be the norm for Democrats at this time but it is both frustrating, and in the case of Russia, very dangerous. It’s sad because people are being used or allowing themselves to be used (paid) in the service of powerful people who do not have the best interest of this nation at heart.

  19. Where’s Assange going to show up for depositions or the trial without getting pinched by Interpol?

    And much as I railed against the Bush-Cheenie-era overuse of surveillance by our government, Assange in my opinion has committed espionage against the United States.

    1. “1. The UN formally found in February 2016 that Julian Assange is unlawfully detained by Sweden and the UK. On 5 February 2016, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention announced its decision after a 16-month investigation into his case. Sweden and the UK participated in the process, but their arguments failed to convince the panel that their actions against Julian Assange were justified. The UN ordered Sweden and UK to immediately release him and compensate him for violating his rights. On 30 November 2016, the United Nations rejected the United Kingdom’s attempt to appeal the UN’s February ruling in favour of Julian Assange.
      2. Assange has not been charged and he is not wanted for trial. The UK Supreme Court acknowledged that Assange is not charged in Sweden. The prosecutor acknowledged in correspondence with UK authorities that the matter is a ’preliminary investigation’, and that no decision had been made to charge.
      3. Assange does not “believe” there is an ’espionage’ case against him, it is a fact. On 19 May 2016, the FBI told a US court that it continues to actively pursue Julian Assange and WikiLeaks. On 15 March 2016, the US Department of Justice filed a 113 page document to court saying that there is a pending national security prosecution against Assange and WikiLeaks. A federal warrant from 2012 shows that the WikiLeaks case concerns Espionage, Conspiracy to commit Espionage, Theft of Government Property, Electronic Espionage (classed as a terrorism offence under the Patriot Act), and (general) Conspiracy. Assange’s alleged co-conspirator, Chelsea Manning, is sentenced to 35 years for revealing information to WikiLeaks. She filed an appeal against her sentence on 18 May 2016.”

      https://justice4assange.com/Assange-Case-Fact-Checker.html

      The facts mentioned here may be fact checked using third party documents. For example, you can look up the UN ruling on arbitrary detention.

      1. Espionage it is. And once he leaves the (whatever – Uruguayan?) embassy, Interpol can and likely will arrest him on those American charges. The Swedish allegations, as I recall, involved women, not children. But, either say, if they’ve been dismissed – which I do not recall ever hearing, but I miss a lot – there is likely a sealed federal indictment resulting in agencies all over the world (except Russia, of course) waiting to snap him up.

    2. “…Assange in my opinion has committed espionage against the United States.”
      And what has the United States committed against the rest of the world? Lets start in the 70s with Argentina, how about the 80s in central America, is there a country anymore in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Yemen? And how about our drug war that has killed hundreds of thousands mainly in Mexico but also in Asia and the United States as well.

      The United States has become a pariah to much of the rest of the world. When will people open their eyes and realize that cheap food and cheap stuff from the rest of the world has come at a cost of millions of lives.

  20. The Pinkos have gotten increasingly strident since Trump got elected – this is just part and parcel of the hysteria (“Trump Derangement Syndrome”).

    Assange aside, I am delighted with the Pinkos showing their true nature. People get to see what the left really is like.

Comments are closed.