[–] William-Marshall 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
Another POV: In Q1287 it was stated: Think logically. How do you introduce evidence into an investigation (legally)? Who has everything? Methods which info collected/ obtained? Admissible in the court of law?
taking this a step further, how do you introduce evidence the Dems will not ignore ? If Assange is extradited then his testimony introduces evidence that cannot be denied by Dems and can't be tied to being tainted by Trump. He could answer questions as to Who, What, When, Why and How info was turned over to him. (Methods which info collected/obtained) That sure would make him a star witness in a tribunal or any other court. And it's possible the declas was waiting on obtaining this "source" ( aka "Who has everything"). And didn't Barr mention he could possibly have a redacted FISA by the end of the week ? Was he the key to the declas and the opening of all the indictments ? Sometimes timing is everything. WWG1WGA !!
[–] quantum1234 ago
The dems are so stupid they are cheering his arrest and are actually calling him a Russian operative...once again their fake outrage will bite them in the ass...
Your postulation is the only thing that makes sense. I am sure the NSA has all the information and more.
Before the 2016 election, I proposed that if anything was defunct about the election, it was BHO's fault since he was the president. I didn't realize how right I would turn out to be.
[–] DyslexicsUntie ago
I don’t think the charge is fraudulent. I do believe that he conspired with the transsexual Manning to steal classified data. He should be investigated for that.