So, apparently Julian Assange’s lawyer said that ex-Rep. Dana Rohrabacher offered Assange a pardon on Donald Trump’s behalf:

Julian Assange court appearance today- His lawyer mentioned a statement, that alleges former US Congressman Dana Rohrabacher visited Assange, saying he was there on behalf of the President, offering a pardon if JA would say Russia had nothing to do with DNC leaks. @SBSNews — Ben Lewis (@benlewismedia) February 19, 2020

Sounds like maybe not quite a direct line from point A to point B. But you’d never know based on this tweet from the Daily Beast:

BREAKING: President Trump offered to pardon Julian Assange if he agreed to cover up the involvement of Russia in hacking emails from the DNC, which were later published by WikiLeaks https://t.co/gUZItaWmy4 — The Daily Beast (@thedailybeast) February 19, 2020

BREAKING: That tweet does not accurately describe what happened. Maybe that’s why they deleted it after about half an hour or so.

They deleted it pic.twitter.com/lmYhiWDR5Q — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) February 19, 2020

As the Daily Beast article says:

LONDON—President Trump offered to pardon Julian Assange if he agreed to cover up the involvement of Russia in hacking emails from the Democratic National Committee, which were later published by WikiLeaks, a London court was told on Wednesday. Lawyers acting for Assange have argued that the Australian should not be extradited to the U.S. because the case is political not criminal. Edward Fitzgerald, Assange’s lawyer, said on Wednesday that a message had been passed on to Assange by former Republican Congressman Dana Rohrabacher. Fitzgerald said a statement produced by Assange’s lawyer, Jennifer Robinson, showed “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.”

“A London court was told.” “A statement produced by Assange’s lawyer.” That … doesn’t seem like enough to be able to declare without reservation that Donald Trump has offered to pardon Julian Assange. Is it possible? Yes. But we’re gonna need a little more evidence than that, Daily Beast. Julian Assange’s word isn’t worth much.

Julian Assange is not a great source on Julian Assange, guys. https://t.co/InJaI55CU3 — Emily Zanotti (@emzanotti) February 19, 2020

Assange ***claimed*** this. This tweet states it as ***fact***. Insane. https://t.co/J1ZH7A2vqb — JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) February 19, 2020

Can we maybe not present claims made by Julian Assange as he faces 17 criminal charges as confirmed facts? https://t.co/64tbBErFvx — Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) February 19, 2020

And especially when Dana Rohrabacher is the supposed intermediary. https://t.co/RIQtDBnT1s — Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) February 19, 2020

WSJ already reported in 2017 that Dana Rohrabacher was publicly campaigning for Assange to be pardoned, and that he basically got the cold shoulder from John Kelly, who didn't pass on his request to the president https://t.co/IAo2cvSGPw — Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) February 19, 2020

Sorry, forgot the link https://t.co/glzNbIZDzo And worth noting that even in Rohrbacher's telling, the pardon would've been in exchange for evidence proving Russia's innocence, which Assange can't produce for obvious reasons — Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) February 19, 2020

Oh well.

guess it's totally confirmed that Seth Rich was the source for the DNC emails, I mean, Assange said so! — Alex Griswold (@HashtagGriswold) February 19, 2020

Maybe next time, the Daily Beast can save themselves the embarrassment and pace themselves a little. We get that they want to impugn Donald Trump’s character, but surely they can wait until something concrete comes along.