Trump Offered Assange Pardon if He Covered Up Russian Hack

[KeithD]

Trump has only himself to blame if the Assange claim has traction. Trump specializes in fake news lies. Of course his own outrageous behavior in this erases any benefit of the doubt he's owed on anything.

 

[Conager]

Where did I, or anyone, bring Trump into this thread? I suggest that you switch to decaf.

Points--->>^

"Trump is in the title of the thread, dummy.

 

[bigsly]

The biggest authoritarian elephant in both Assange's and Snowden's cases is the dictatorial effect of the Espionage Act of 1917, which continues to be in full force today, with assorted amending through its over 100 years of repugnant enforcement.

Because of its unAmerican dictate, neither Assange or Snowden have any realistic opportunity whatsoever of fairly defending themselves in any U.S. court of law which, conversely (and no doubt the main reason statist government loves the Act) allows statist government to fully CONTROL the entire narrative of any proceedings which, in turn, means Americans can never see for themselves the actual truth as it naturally unfolds in what's constitutionally supposed to be the ultimate American arena of justice for all.

Trump needs to interfere and order the DoJ to drop the Espionage Act charges against both Assange and Snowden, which will then allow them to fairly defend themselves against the Deep State and allow the American people to learn the truth(s) about their cases, whichever way justice may fall.

 

[KeithD]

You're in favor of treason and abuse of power. Got it. And it's not a surprise. It's probably what you've learned to live with in Moscow.

 

[icanhelp1]

Last time I looked, Assange's statements were not being offered into evidence in a trial. Or do the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to news articles now?

It did for the Mueller report!

 

[DeluxAuto]

FAKE NEWS
https://www.rohrabacher.com/news

When was the last time someone actually believed your poor rhetoric?

 

[DeluxAuto]

so, posting what the person at the center of this

denying it all

IS MY RHETORIC?

She's a hippie lettuce smoker.

 

[bigsly]

You're in favor of treason and abuse of power. Got it. And it's not a surprise. It's probably what you've learned to live with in Moscow.

Go pimp it to your girlfriend Schiff, blowboi.

 

[ishtat]

Possible. But let us remember, Assange is a traitor...and most likely, will say anything to get off.

A traitor to which country and how did you take this from allegation to assumption?

And a general question for everyone: why did Rohrabacher go to see Assange at all if he did not intend to cut some sort of deal ? I am not suggesting that Rohrabacher was under any kind of orders from Trump - but why did he go at all?

Incidentally, the allegation of Rohrabacher's attempted bribe was accepted in evidence before the Westminster Magistrates court hearing the case for Assange's extradition to the USA

 

[bigsly]

Incidentally, the allegation of Rohrabacher's attempted bribe was accepted in evidence before the Westminster Magistrates court hearing the case for Assange's extradition to the USA

As was Carter Page's alleged Russian collusion accepted in evidence before the FISC...

Your point?

 

[Heathers_Front]

Your problem with your lack of understanding is that you're trying to debate things while you're "high as fuck". To cover up your lack of understand you do what you and most other people do best - you blame the messenger instead of yourself and your habits for creating the conditions that cause your lack of understanding.

The gate for boarding the Express Train to Stupidville is that a way ----------------->

Dont worry, he will just follow you.

 

[HisArpy]

Dont worry, he will just follow you.

In the real world it's called stalking.

But then, you probably know all about that already. Right?

 

[KeithD]

Go pimp it to your girlfriend Schiff, blowboi.

No, I didn't think you had an answer for that. Triggered much?

It's always telling when they retreat to gay bashing . . .

 

[KeithD]

As was Carter Page's alleged Russian collusion accepted in evidence before the FISC...

Your point?

Well, Carter Page is guilty as fuck. Just another of the Russian mafia in the Trump regime. You are too, I assume(?)

 

[bigsly]

It's always telling when they retreat to gay bashing . . .

I'm sorry, you claim to be bi but are now claiming gay victimhood? Awww.

Here, a reward for such a pussy effort...

https://www.rei.com/media/product/875510

 

[bigsly]

...I assume...

Well, of course you do, buttboi.

 

[HisArpy]

Now see you went and fucked up again by using the word intelligence in a manner that suggests you have it. Stop doing that.

So, does this mean you're retracting your earlier comment? This one:

You have some decent points..

Because if I'm "not intelligent", according you in the above post, then I must have stumbled over those "decent points". Which kind of means that they're not mine, i just found them and repeated them.

However, the fact that you ascribed them "to me" kind of indicates that you couldn't tell the difference. Which next suggests that your assessment of my intelligence level is flawed.

Which is pretty typical for you because you can't tell the difference between courage and cowardice. You think that anyone who HIDES behind a VPN is "courageous" after he is banned multiple times and keeps returning. Meanwhile, the guy who has his IRL information mandated by the State to be public information is "dumb" for allowing you to post it on the board in violation of the rules.

For which you were bannhammered. And then when you returned, you boasted about how you'd do it again. For which you were banhammered AGAIN. And yet here you are once more, thinking you're "courageous" and "smart" while cowering the whole time behind your VPN so you don't get banhammered again and saying I'm the unintelligent one.

You should learn what intelligence really means. Because when push comes to shove, you don't have any of that either.

 

[Heathers_Front]

In the real world it's called stalking.

But then, you probably know all about that already. Right?

No it isnt. Not when you're going to the same destination, tim foil.

And you have the audacity to call yourself a lawyer.

 

[HisArpy]

No it isnt. Not when you're going to the same destination, tim foil.

And you have the audacity to call yourself a lawyer.

Actually, it's the State of Calfornia which calls me that. Which means you fucked up again. Not that anyone is keeping count after all the thousands of other fuckups you've done in the same way and STILL haven't learned from.

 

[coati]

I'd believe Assange over Trump or one of Trump's goons.

Remember when the now-impeached President said, "WikiLeaks! I love WikiLeaks." He also publicly said, "Russia, if you are out there listening, find the missing emails."

But ever since that time, his fragile ego has been obsessed with "proving" that the Russians did not have anything to do with the hacks: "Putin told me that Russia had nothing to do with the hacks, and I believe him".

It was a deep state hoax about Russian hacks, right? Besides, his fragile ego could not stand the thought that Russia's hacks made the difference in his election. What a fucking idiot-- he broadcasts his cheating requests, and then tries to cover them up.

I hope Assange has the goods on this corrupt impeached President. It would be just one more example of corruption by the most divisive President in American history.

 

[schism666]

So, does this mean you're retracting your earlier comment? This one:



Because if I'm "not intelligent", according you in the above post, then I must have stumbled over those "decent points". Which kind of means that they're not mine, i just found them and repeated them.

However, the fact that you ascribed them "to me" kind of indicates that you couldn't tell the difference. Which next suggests that your assessment of my intelligence level is flawed.

Which is pretty typical for you because you can't tell the difference between courage and cowardice. You think that anyone who HIDES behind a VPN is "courageous" after he is banned multiple times and keeps returning. Meanwhile, the guy who has his IRL information mandated by the State to be public information is "dumb" for allowing you to post it on the board in violation of the rules.

For which you were bannhammered. And then when you returned, you boasted about how you'd do it again. For which you were banhammered AGAIN. And yet here you are once more, thinking you're "courageous" and "smart" while cowering the whole time behind your VPN so you don't get banhammered again and saying I'm the unintelligent one.

You should learn what intelligence really means. Because when push comes to shove, you don't have any of that either.

context. learn it.

 

[KeithD]

I'd believe Assange over Trump or one of Trump's goons.

Trump has worked himself into a corner where just about anyone can be believed over him. He's done it to himself.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Last time I looked, Assange's statements were not being offered into evidence in a trial. Or do the Federal Rules of Evidence apply to news articles now?

They do if they support BarristerTimmay's preconceived political biases.

 

[Rightguide]

https://www.businessinsider.com/julian-assange-trial-offered-pardon-deny-russia-2016-dnc-hack-2020-2

Its fake news. It is well known now the Russians did not hack the DNC servers. It was an inside job. Bill Binney proved it and a case alleging it was has been tossed by a federal juge.

 

[ishtat]

The barrister Edward Fitzgerald representing Assange only brought this up in a procedural hearing to ensure that this line of enquiry was admissable as evidence in the main extradition hearing when that starts next week. The magistrate ruled that it was admissible.

Trump started to deny immediately, Rohrabacher is backpedalling furiously, the only certainty is that Assange's council has given the absolute minimum information to ensure admissibility. It is a certainty that more will be revealed when the substantive evidence is examined and cross examined.

The basic questions remain: why did Rohrabacher go to see Assange at all - what did they discuss for three hours? Will Gen Kelly confirm that Rohrabacher was acting without authority (if Kelly knew)? Will Rohrabacher be sub-poenad to give evidence?

The extradition hearing is going to be a doozy. Do not jump to conclusions, there will be plenty more to come.