Did you actually read the interview? It lists and explains evidence that this history of sexual misconduct is, at least in large parts, intentionally constructed by the public authorities
While both these articles go into details about unsavory awful behavior, there is no indication of (additional) sexual misconduct in them. Claiming that there are more cases despite that seems misleading.
While I do not approve of Assanges actions and statements as detailed in the intercept article, being a douche is not evidence of sexual misconduct
It is not, but there is a strong correlation, and you should bear it in mind when evaluating how likely you think those accusations are to be true.
I am sure I have read other more direct accusations, but unfortunately I am not finding the sources at the moment.
I still think these articles are more than enough to cast some pretty strong doubts over the claims of his defences, and I think nobody who has read them should be quite so eager to run to his defence.
