Wikileaks Rips Guardian’s Manafort-Assange Report by ‘Serial Fabricator’, Offers Million Dollar Challenge

The Guardian is at it again. This time, resorting to the old gag of inserting the obligatory propaganda caveat “sources say” to its original report.

In the report, co-authored by the paper’s Luke Harding and Dan Collyns, it was claimed that ex-Trump campaign executive Paul Manafort met with Wikileaks’ Julian Assange several times including “around the time” he joined the Trump campaign.

#TheGuardian #LukeHarding pull the same gag #CNN does daily to launder its #FakeNews by inserting the obligatory propaganda caveat “sources say”. Why not just merge offices of intel agencies and Islington & save loads of money, no? https://t.co/hyU1YD6s7n

— Patrick Henningsen (@21WIRE) November 28, 2018

Pictured Above: Screen grab from The Guardian’s front page, 27 Nov 2018.

The Guardian report also claims that both the Manafort and Assange camps were given a chance to respond and issue denials but failed to do so before publication. To which Wikileaks responded quickly with:

More falsehoods from the Guardian. @WikiLeaks scooped the Guardian and made the denial public to 5.4 million — including the editor of the Guardian, @KathViner, who follows @WIkiLeaks — hours before the Guardian published its astonishing fraud.https://t.co/FFwpioILuf

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) November 28, 2018

And then the whistleblowing publisher put a million dollar challenge on offer, ripping the paper’s report and its co-author, Luke Harding, an ardent Russophobe:

Remember this day when the Guardian permitted a serial fabricator to totally destroy the paper’s reputation. @WikiLeaks is willing to bet the Guardian a million dollars and its editor’s head that Manafort never met Assange. https://t.co/R2Qn6rLQjn

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) November 27, 2018

For those readers not familiar with Harding’s previous work, he literally wrote a book titled “Collusion” where he puts his grand Russia conspiracy theory adventurism on full display. Watch as Aaron Maté of TheRealNews obliterates his Russiagate thesis:

Wikileaks has now upped the ante, with an open challenge to prove who is more “trustworthy and accurate” as a publisher:

Question: What’s the best “define your own bet” market where WikiLeaks can let the general public bet on who will be proved trustworthy and accurate, WikiLeaks or the Guardian?

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) November 28, 2018

We remind our readers that Wikileaks, whether you love or loathe it, has a 100% perfect record on the facts in its reports. The Guardian, however, not even close.

READ MORE RUSSIAGATE NEWS AT: 21st Century Wire Russiagate Files

SUPPORT 21WIRE – SUBSCRIBE & BECOME A MEMBER @21WIRE.TV

21st Century Wire is an alternative news agency designed to enlighten, inform and educate readers about world events which are not always covered in the mainstream media.