Part 1 —> Jesselyn Radack: Her Criminal Conviction, One-Year Suspended Jail Sentence and Her “Client” Edward Snowden
Part 2 —> Jesselyn Radack: Her First Criminal Offense, 2018 Deposition and Client Daniel Hale
Part 3 —> Jesselyn Radack: Her Arrest, the 2014 Polk Awards, and Daniel Hale
OPINON: What is perhaps the most baffling part of this story is that after Jesselyn Radack was charged with a felony, after she put all of her clients at risk, and fresh off the heels of completing a one-year suspended jail sentence, she decided to embark on an extramarital affair with Julian Assange’s then-PR representative, Trevor Fitzgibbon. It was yet another inexplicable decision that opened herself up to both foreign and domestic blackmail, and the affair curiously ended with Radack falsely accusing him of assault and rape.
While accompanied by high-powered attorney, Gloria Allred, on March 7, 2016, Radack and two other women marched into a Washington D.C. Metropolitan police department and filed multiple sexual assault allegations.
One women claimed that Fitzgibbon had “inappropriately hugged” her in the office, a third degree sexual abuse claim that shockingly carries up to a ten-year prison sentence and a fine of up to $25,000. The second woman alleged that Fitzgibbon had touched her buttocks during a board meeting held at the office of the law firm representing Fitzgibbon’s company, although the allegation has never been confirmed by a single attendee.
And finally, Mrs. Jesselyn Radack, armed with a manufactured story that she knew would protect her character while destroying her ex-paramour’s in the process, told Officer Oranchak that Fitzgibbon had sexually assaulted her in her office and then raped her a few weeks later in a hotel room. If convicted, he faced life in prison and fines up to $125,000.
Months prior, Radack had engaged in an extramarital affair with Fitzgibbon that she explicitly used for her own financial and professional gain. Sprinkled in between text messages that contained titillating innuendos, photos of her naked breasts and requests that Fitzgibbon divulge his sexual fantasies in writing, were requests for professional favors.
For example, on November 16, 2015, at 8:19 a.m., she sent him a salacious photo of her derrière as a “special thank you” for his professional help.
While plying him with graphic photos of her breasts, she asked him if he could get The Intercept’s Jeremy Scahill to retweet one of her social media posts. She then quickly followed that up with a request that he send her a photo of his groin area. Fitzgibbon refused.
On November 30th, they made plans to meet the following morning at the Hotel Lombardy in Washington D.C. with the intention of having sex. Radack then asked him for yet another professional favor which clearly entailed financial gain for her non-profit organization:
Shoot I wanted to see you too…Morning works…It’s Giving Tuesday and we have a clever GoFundMe one-day campaign. Can you help me get eyes on it?
— Jesselyn Radack, November 30, 2015
On December 1st, they met at the Hotel Lombardy where they had consensual sex. Hours later, she not only asked him to share her Facebook and Twitter posts, she asked him to “personally vouch for it.” He did, and then she essentially accused him of not doing so. I mean, how hard is it to go to someone’s Twitter account to see if they retweeted something? Twitter also notifies you of direct retweets FFS. Radack eventually apologized for not seeing his posts and added, “I’m REALLY sore. Haven’t been fucked like that ever.”
The November/December 4th Assault
Despite Radack accusations, it is indisputable that her police report, text messages, 2018 deposition, a hotel receipt, and two alibis betray her story. First, she told the police that Fitzgibbon initially assaulted her in her office on December 4, 2015, but the problem with her narrative is that he wasn’t in town on that date. He was at a company retreat in Texas.
During a 2018 deposition she changed her story—which virtually every “truth and transparency” and “adversarial” journalist has ignored—and said that the assault happened on November 4th, but even that’s problematic.
In mid-November 2015, if not sooner, they started exchanging sexually-charged text messages and by the end of month they had made plans to meet at the Hotel Lombardy in Washington D.C. on December 1st.
Based on the text messages that Radack sent Fitzgibbon, if he assaulted her in her office on November 4th, as she claimed under oath, that means she sent Fitzgibbon photos of her naked breasts, encouraged him to talk about his sexual fantasies via unencrypted comms, told him he had to use condoms with her, and requested he send her a photo of his groin area after he allegedly assaulted her.
Then she made plans to meet him at the Lombardy Hotel for sex, again, after he supposedly assaulted her in her office.
And throughout her sextingscapades, Radack repeatedly asked Fitzgibbon for professional favors, again, AFTER she claims he assaulted her in her office (by putting his hand up her shirt without her consent).
After making plans to have consensual sex with Fitzgibbon on December 1st at the Hotel Lombardy, Radack alleged that he raped her instead. At no point has Radack ever claimed that more than two sexual encounters happened between them: One at her office on December 4th (which she later changed to November 4th, and now shows that she sent him photos of her naked breasts and asked for professional favors after this alleged assault) and one at the Hotel Lombardy.
However, just like the November 4th incident, Radack’s story doesn’t add up. She discussed meeting Fitzgibbon at the hotel on the morning of December 1st and a hotel receipt shows that Fitzgibbon had a room there:
Hours after they met at the hotel, Radack asked Fitzgibbon for more professional favors and this is now after she claims he assaulted her twice, including allegedly raping her that very morning.
She then texted him the evening of December 1st, “I’m REALLY sore. Haven’t been fucked like that ever.”
If text messages show them making plans to meet at the Lombardy on the morning of December 1st, a hotel receipt shows Fitzgibbon had a room there on December 1st, and Radack told him on the evening of December 1st that she had never “been fucked like that ever,” it stands to reason that one of the only two sexual encounters that she has ever mentioned occurred on December 1st, right? Right. But that’s not what she told the police or stated under oath during her 2018 deposition.
Radack has maintained that they met at the Lombardy on December 8th but, once again, Fitzgibbon wasn’t even in Washington D.C. on that date. It’s like she pulled a date out of her arse knowing full well that the liberal media would still run with it.
Moreover, she probably knew that both liberal and progressive organizations, publishers like WikiLeaks, and activists within the truth and transparency movement wouldn’t have the balls to call her out, especially with the advent of the #MeToo movement, and she was absolutely right.
Despite Radack’s best efforts to convince the world that her piping hot bowl of false accusations were true, it comes as no surprise that the Department of Justice declined to prosecute Fitzgibbon because how do you prosecute someone for assault and rape when they weren’t even in town when the acts supposedly occurred?
Remember when I pointed out in a previous article that Radack tried to disparage a journalist’s reputation in her 2018 deposition by claiming that he got the date wrong when Daniel Hale was raided (he didn’t) and he had “gotten dates wrong in his reporting before”? One year prior, that same journalist was the only one who reported (below) that the DOJ cleared Fitzgibbon of any and all sexual misconduct charges so imagine my surprise that Radack tried to disparage him during a deposition a year later. Gotta get those jabs in after you’ve been exposed, amirite?
Despite Radack’s “rape” story being a completely manufactured pile of Amber Heard horseshit based on a mountain of evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that she lied, she has not stopped harassing and obsessing over Fitzgibbon for the last seven years.
Rather, she has spent an enormous amount of time trying to convince people, both publicly and privately, that her story is true, and she and her associates have run a virtually non-stop, targeted defamation campaign against him (and others). I would know because I have first-hand experience.
In mid-2018, Radack privately sent me a copy of a ten-day temporary protection order (TPP) she obtained against Fitzgibbon despite the fact I was a complete stranger. Julian Assange had retweeted six of my articles four months prior which, perhaps, gave Radack the impression that I was some sort of insider (I’m not, nor have I ever been). Regardless of why she sent it to me, her actions made it very clear which activist community she was targeting by planting disinformation with its members.
Radack filed the TPP mere days after Fitzgibbon finally sued her for defamation in April 2018. She didn’t file the TPP back in 2015, when she claims he assaulted her in her office. She didn’t file it when she claims he raped her at the hotel on a day when he wasn’t even in town. And she didn’t file one after she filed her allegations with the Washington D.C. Metropolitan police in early 2016.
She filed it days after she was finally sued in what was surely a bid to play the victim, protect her arse, and discredit her victim. And then she passed it around to complete strangers.
Radack then lied on Twitter about why she obtained the TPP and deliberately hid the fact that a judge completely shot down her application for a permanent restraining order. It was so bad that even the judge noted in his ruling that Radack failed to supply the court with any evidence whatsoever to support her argument that Fitzgibbon was harassing and threatening her. For the full story see:
During the 2018 defamation case, Radack was warned by a different judge to refrain from posting anything further about Fitzgibbon on social media but, apparently having no self control whatsoever, she continued to do so to the point that she was held in contempt and sanctioned by the court (PDF document). She then settled with Fitzgibbon and publicly retracted her statements.
Neither contrition nor emotional distress nor illness nor financial difficulties can excuse deliberate misconduct of this sort by any litigant, much less by a lawyer. And, the record here shows that Radack is a sharp-tongued, mean-spirited, proliferous user of social media. Her conduct here is just more of the same. Neither contrition nor emotional distress nor illness nor financial distress have caused Radack to ameliorate her penchant for nasty social media communication…
To that end, the Court concludes that an appropriate punishment for violating the July 31, 2018 ORDER (EOF No. 41) is that Radack be held in contempt of Court for committing the violation so that, wherever she seeks to practice, she will have to report that she has been held in contempt of Court. That, for a lawyer, is an extremely serious punishment.
— Judge Robert E. Payne, April 26, 2019
Radack breached the first settlement agreement within months because, again, no self control. When she was sued for a second time, the case gained ginormous traction after attorney Steven Biss filed a subpoena for @DevinCow’s Twitter DMs (along with mine and a dozen or so other accounts), which inevitably led everyone to believe that this was somehow indicative of Radack’s honesty.
You know the drill, paint one as the devil so the other looks like an angel. That kind of propaganda and PSYOPY bullshit.
In reality, which most people don’t seem to live in anymore, Biss didn’t file Radack’s false rape allegation with the Metropolitan police. Biss didn’t post Radack’s defamatory statements. Biss didn’t accuse anyone of sexual assault and rape on dates when the alleged assailant wasn’t even in town. Biss didn’t change his story years later, dramatically, no less, by changing the entire date of when a rape supposedly occurred.
Biss didn’t send salacious photos of himself weeks after he accused the recipient of attacking him. Biss isn’t the one who sanctioned Radack after she was warned by a judge to shut it on social media. Biss didn’t privately pass around a ten-day temporary restraining order to complete strangers in order to further decimate the reputation of his victim and divide an activist community. Biss wasn’t the judge that found Radack’s argument so underwhelming and unconvincing that he ruled against her request for a permanent restraining order. And it wasn’t Biss who violated her settlement agreement.
It doesn’t matter if Biss is an idiot, or not. Radack did all of these things herself and then she tried to blame the victim, and grift for money to cover her legal expenses. I mean, that is one serious scam she’s used to con a lot of people, especially whistleblowers and Julian Assange supporters. And frankly, the fact that someone like Biss was able to crush her in court, multiple times, no less, says more about Radack’s honesty and lack thereof, than anything else.
At the end of the day, Radack settled the second court case and publicly retracted her statements yet again…and then she proceeded to post more defamatory material on Twitter, which I mentioned earlier (see the “WTF” article above).
Radack’s Batshit Hypocrisy and Obsession With Fitzgibbon
Despite everything that Radack has alleged about Fitzgibbon like, oh you know, attacking her in her office, raping her in a hotel, threatening her family, and sending hordes of trolls to harass her online, all of which she’s claimed in a myriad of court documents, Radack is so obsessed with Fitzgibbon that as of when this article was published, she was (inexplicably) following him on Twitter:
And despite settling the second defamation suit years ago, she still has “@DevinCow conspirator” in her bio because apparently the cow’s support is the only thing she has to manipulate the masses into believing that toxic, privileged, white women should be allowed to make false rape allegations and get away with it.
After her criminal record was exposed last week, the very first thing she did on Twitter was respond to a tweet made by Jim Stewartson, which wasn’t about Biss at all but Radack sure tried to make it about him. Stewartson is a guy that half of the internet seems to hate because of the never ending and egregious defamation he spreads across the universe…allegedly.
For example, between 2020-2021, Radack’s associates (and maybe Radack herself) privately fed him false and defamatory information about Fitzgibbon and others such as myself. Not surprisingly, her defamation buddy is currently being sued for libel by former National Security Advisor, Michael Flynn, for accusing him of being a Qanon leader, among a host of other things.
Basically, the level of batshit hypocrisy at which Radack operates is stunning. This is the same woman who was sanctioned by a judge and now wherever she practices law, she is legally obligated to report that she was held in contempt of court. She also used attorney Bruce Fein to represent her, you know, the “sleazy old GOP operator with a murky relationship to US intelligence” that goes back decades.
Let’s not forget that Radack is the convicted criminal here, not Biss or Fitzgibbon. Yes, you are allowed to hate them as much as you want but it doesn’t change the facts of the story:
I mean, isn’t that what WikiLeaks, Stella Morris and Assange supporters are always going on about when it comes to Assange vs. WikiLeaks’ publications ? And why has the public been fed a script about the injustice of Assange being falsely accused of rape and how the woman who accused him must be a CIA operative, but this story, the story of how Edward f*cking Snowden’s self-professed attorney hid a felony charge, received a one-year suspended jail sentence, and then falsely accused Assange’s PR representative of rape, isn’t newsworthy?
I can assure you, it is newsworthy, it’s just that courage isn’t always contagious. Some of us will patiently sit back and wait for the historians.
A few days ago, Radack dug up a two-year old tweet posted by Stewartson that appears to be a dig at Fitzgibbon seeing that this was during the time period when he was being fed disinformation from well-known trolls and foreign disinfo agents that Radack has associated with for years.
The message that she seems to be conveying is that anyone who dares to speak the truth about what she’s done must be a “Trevor” troll because that’s how frauds delegitimize both the message and the messenger. In reality, Radack’s the only one digging up ancient tweets to deliberately troll, defame, and distract. This, knowing full well that she’s been the convicted criminal all along.
Disclaimer: Ten thousand more pages of disclaimers to follow.
If you were mentioned in this article because your associate(s) did or said something stupid/dishonest, that’s not a suggestion that you did or said something stupid/dishonest or that you took part in it. Of course, some may conclude on their own that you associate with stupid/dishonest individuals but that’s called having the right to an opinion. If I’ve questioned something that doesn’t make sense to me, that’s not me spinning the confusing material you’ve put out. That’s me trying to make sense out of something that doesn’t make sense. And if I’ve noted that you failed to back up your allegations that means I either missed where you posted it or you failed to back your shiz up.
If I haven’t specifically stated that I believe (my opinion) someone is associated with someone else or an event, then it means just that. I haven’t reported an association nor is there any inference of association on my part. For example, just because someone is mentioned in this article, it doesn’t mean that they’re involved or associated with everyone and everything else mentioned. If I believe that there’s an association between people and/or events, I’ll specifically report it.
If anyone mentioned in this article wants to claim that I have associated them with someone else or an event because I didn’t disclose every single person and event in the world that they are NOT associated with, that’s called gaslighting an audience and it’s absurd hogwash i.e. “They mentioned that I liked bananas but they didn’t disclose that I don’t like apples. Why are they trying to associate me with apples???” Or something similar to this lovely gem, “I did NOT give Trish the thumb drive!” in order to make their lazy audience believe that it was reported they gave Trish the thumb drive when, in fact, that was never reported, let alone inferred.
That’s some of the BS I’m talking about so try not to act like a psychiatric patient, intelligence agent, or paid cyber mercenary by doing these things. If you would like to share your story, viewpoint, or any evidence that pertains to this article, or feel strongly that something needs to be clarified or corrected (again, that actually pertains to the article), you can reach me at firstname.lastname@example.org with any questions or concerns.
I cannot confirm and am not confirming the legitimacy of any messages or emails in this article. Please see a doctor if sensitivity continues. If anyone asks, feel free to tell them that I work for Schoenberger, Fitzgibbon, Steven Biss, the CIA, or really just about any intelligence agency because your idiocy, ongoing defamation, and failure as a human is truly a sight to behold for the rest of us.
If I described you as a fruit basket or even a mental patient it's because that is my opinion of you, it's not a diagnosis. I'm not a psychiatrist nor should anyone take my personal opinions as some sort of clinical assessment. Contact @BellaMagnani if you want a rundown on the psych profile she ran on you.
This is an Op-ed article. The information contained in this post is for general information purposes only. While we endeavor to keep the information up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information contained on the post for any purpose. The owner of this blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site.
The views or opinions represented in this blog do not represent those of people, institutions or organizations that the owner may or may not be associated with in professional or personal capacity, unless explicitly stated. Any views or opinions are not intended to malign any religion, ethnic group, club, organization, company, or individual.
The owner will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information. The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or use of this information.