re: Member the Assange meeting with Rep. Dana Rohrabacher?

quote:

---

As early as 2012, it has been reported that the U.S. secretly indicted Julian Assange.

---

There was a leak regarding correspondences of POTENTIAL CHARGES.

quote:

---

There is a reason he hasn't been able to leave the Ecuadorian embassy in years.

---

Yeah he was accused of a crime in Sweden. I just posted an article here he is willing to be "extradited" to the US, so you're point doesn't make sense.

quote:

---

The intelligence establishment has an adversarial relationship with Donald Trump.

---

Of course they do. Trump repeatedly attacked them even before he became president. Like the media, establishment, and everybody else he's attacked, people tend to fight back. Yet people conveniently ignore, or excuse, that he's often initiated the attack.

quote:

---

Agencies like the NSA and CIA have themselves become unelected branches of government with little to no oversight by anyone.

---

Well they have a boss. And he happens to he Trump. And despite a few leaks months ago, there hasn't been all that many leaks that compromise Trump. In fact, the most concerning one was regarding the information about the terrorism at the Ariana concert.

If the IC had it out for Trump as much as you're arguing, and they were as powerful as you're arguing, then they could have easily done far more harm. There doesn't have to be anything illegal or even shady, we've seen from Wikileaks that emails regarding innocuous things can seem quite shady without enough context.

quote:

---

The validity of documents released by Wikileaks since its inception has never been an issue.

---

No. What he releases is legitimate, but I think this has somehow given him some unnecessary level of integrity and credibility. I see him as a necessary evil, exposing things that should be exposed. A necessary evil, elevated to near infallibility, can be dangerous.

In his case, he may never commit a lie of commission, but lies of omission should always be a concern. And the way he sometimes releases things is concerning, and seems deceptive.

For example, as soon as Mueller was appointed, wikileaks highlighted a document regarding Mueller's plan to provide uranium to Russia (or maybe Ukraine; don't remember exactly). It seemed highly shady without any context, but to find out, it was sharing the uranium for the purpose of a major criminal investigation. Wikileaks had to know this, since it wasn't a secret, so why would they highlight the document that would appear shady without the context necessary to know it wasn't?

quote:

---

I imagine whatever Assange has as proof would shock the conscience of the average American.

---

Isn't that odd? The guy whose credibility and status is based on his release of such information, is somehow being secretive with it, and NOT releasing it. Instead he chooses the one person who may actually be what people accuses Trump of regarding Russia to share this information? And remember this information is related to the conspiracy that he helped perpetuate (Seth Rich), with his inexcusably coy remarks.

In other words, we need to stop pretending Assange is some infallible person, whose sole purpose is to expose all corruption. He's become increasingly political, coy, and secretive, so this view is dangerous because necessary evil still includes evil. Holding him accountable, maintaining skepticism, and acknowledging possible ulterior motives is vital to maintain the necessary part of him and limiting the evil part.

quote:

---

someone listed here a few weeks ago the things these guys called. take it with a grain of salt...whatevs floats your boat.

---

There guys? Are you sure Jack was one of them? Cernovich appeared to actually have a source in the NSC, but he often posts a lot of fake news regarding everything else. But he seemed to be more connected, and wasn't some unknown person in this type of work before Trump.

Jack seemed to become a "journalist" solely to shill for Trump. And for all of the criticism you all throw at the MSM, the fact that you're not doing that at all with person whose journalism career is solely comprised of shilling for a person, including a bunch (probably mostly) of fake news, is quite telling.

quote:

---

wow, we know this is scary...the prog filth and fake "moderates" and "libertarians" cant post fast enough to claim...."nuh uh"

---

Says the guy who can't distinguish fake news from real. Way to fall for Cajun Angelle's fake news thread earlier today!

Dignan melt

quote:

---

Of Assange had proof of any of that he would release it.

---

If he didn't would he receive immunity though? He offered proof for immunity. No proof no immunity IMO.

quote:

---

Of Assange had proof of any of that he would release it.

---

Why would he give it up for free when the deep state he's against wants to deprive him of his freedom

quote:

---

Why would he give it up for free when the deep state he's against wants to deprive him of his freedom

---

If the information is what you say it is it would blow a hole in this "Deep State".

quote:

---

His name was Seth Rich

---

More details are coming out it seems that seth and his brother were providing wikileaks with the DNC information.


The NSA also played a role

Yeah, in all these leaks, there is something Trump can use to get the upper hand. He needs to dig deep here and gain an advantage over the deep state. Trump is gonna have to stir up shite in order to get everyone to tow the company line. Right now, not everyone thinks they have to follow orders. If Trump can dig up some dirt, the swamp can start draining.