Assange says.......

[G-Man]

The e-mails leaked before the election were not received by Wikileaks from Russia.

He, and Wiki, have never been proven wrong in 11 years.

Were there other leaked e-mails, other than the ones leaked by Wiki, that are said to have affected the election?  Were these leaks from Russia?

I personally only recall the leaks from Wiki.

I know he's slime, however, his record of being right on the money is perfect so far.  So, if the only leaks said to have affected the election came from Wiki, and Wiki denies they came to them from Russia, what is this Russia thing all about?  What am I missing?

Thanks.

[Gavin_Sons]

smoke and mirrors.

[Alpha Dog]

Last summer Assange hinted around that the Dem. operative that delivered the hacked emails was Seth Rich.  He did this by noting Seth's very peculiar murder and that it can be dangerous for people that get into this game, so to speak.  He would not come out and say who it was as he has always protected the identity of clients.  The murder went down by local police as a robbery turned murder even tough he was not robbed, in fact his body contained more than 2k worth of jewelry and cash.  I have no idea who put out the hit on Seth, I can only speculate like everyone else but will not do this.

Of course you are correct G Man.  Assange made it adamantly clear it was no state actor that provided the emails.   We found out earlier this year the CIA ( and gosh knows what other intelligence operations ) have the ability to make hacks look like the work of well known Russian Phising hacks.   Also the Dem Party would not let the FBI investigate their hacked emails, instead they turned this over to a private foreign company that has a long history of being devious  and who hates and trys to undermine the Russians.  Their name escapes me but can be easily found.   The FBI may have been given privilege after they were done.   

[Moonshot_1]

I don't know but the thought is interesting.

Trump on the campaign trail spoke of an independent prosecutor to investigate Hillary.
Obviously, such an appointment by Trump would never be considered independent.

But suppose he got the AG to recuse himself and the Deputy AG, appointed by a Democrat, inherits the Russian case. When the ducks are in a row, Trump fires the FBI Director Comey and triggers the Deputy AG to name a Special Council to investigate the Russian case. Which would have to include the emails supposedly hacked by the Russians.

We know there hasn't been any credible or tangible evidence about Trump and Russian collusion.
And surely there would have been something exposed, some crime discovered by now. But nothing.

Pretty much leaves the emails and the criminality on the Democrat's side to be investigated since it is related to the Russian case.

I think the Democrats and Clinton have been check-mated and don't know it yet.

[Serk]

I'm having a hard time keeping up, are Republicans supposed to like Assange this week, and Democrats want his head on a platter, or was that last week, and now Republicans want his head on a platter and Democrats like him? 

[Wizzard]

I'm having a hard time keeping up, are Republicans supposed to like Assange this week, and Democrats want his head on a platter, or was that last week, and now Republicans want his head on a platter and Democrats like him? 

Ditto.


And since Comey keeps memo's on everything,, I want to see the memos he has on the Clinton -Lynch meeting.

[Willow]

I hope we don't get into prosecuting ex-presidents and losing presidential candidates.  That is commonly done elsewhere and I don't want the U.S.to become like those elsewhere places. The damage to the country as a whole is not worth the small victory of justice.  That's my personal opinion.

I would like enough exposed of political leaders' wrong acts to remove them from public (voter) favor.  Unfortunately recent history doesn't seem to support that hope.

Conservatives do need to keep foremost in their minds how close the past elections were and remember that our job is still to gain more support in the voting public.

[Alberta Patriot]

There is a lot of bullshit and viteol being spread by the left wing MSM without even a shred of any credible information...This says it all:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBUmwHijOag
There is supposedly a clear separation of "religion and state" but the Democrats and the far left media have manufactured a new religion...Political Correctness...and it is going to destroy not just the USA but all democracy as we know it.
Political Correctness is the new fascism.

[Chrisj CMA]

All the drama as painful as it is going through it will all be worth it if HRC winds up in prison. 

[Moonshot_1]

I hope we don't get into prosecuting ex-presidents and losing presidential candidates.  That is commonly done elsewhere and I don't want the U.S.to become like those elsewhere places. The damage to the country as a whole is not worth the small victory of justice.  That's my personal opinion.

I would like enough exposed of political leaders' wrong acts to remove them from public (voter) favor.  Unfortunately recent history doesn't seem to support that hope.

Conservatives do need to keep foremost in their minds how close the past elections were and remember that our job is still to gain more support in the voting public.

Prosecuting ex-presidents and losing presidential candidates or anyone for political gain is reprehensible and unacceptable.

But if such people, regardless of party, committed serious felonies while in office, running for office, whether they win or lose the position, even if otherwise fulfilling the duties of the office, if they are suspected and there is evidence to show they have committed serious felonies or perpetrated crimes, shouldn't justice prevail?

[Jess from VA]

Yes.   

[G-Man]

OK, but my original question is, if the guy who leaked the e-mails, said it wasn't the Russians who gave them to him, what is the whole Russia-U.S. Election investigation all about?  What else did Russia supposedly do? 

I keep hearing about intelligence from all over that says Russia hacked our election.  But I haven't heard about any hacking, other than what Wiki released. 

[The emperor has no clothes]

OK, but my original question is, if the guy who leaked the e-mails, said it wasn't the Russians who gave them to him, what is the whole Russia-U.S. Election investigation all about?  What else did Russia supposedly do? 

I keep hearing about intelligence from all over that says Russia hacked our election.  But I haven't heard about any hacking, other than what Wiki released. 

If the Russians hacked the info and turned it over to an intermediary who sent it to Assange. Technically it didn't come from the Russians.

[Gavin_Sons]

OK, but my original question is, if the guy who leaked the e-mails, said it wasn't the Russians who gave them to him, what is the whole Russia-U.S. Election investigation all about?  What else did Russia supposedly do? 

I keep hearing about intelligence from all over that says Russia hacked our election.  But I haven't heard about any hacking, other than what Wiki released. 

If the Russians hacked the info and turned it over to an intermediary who sent it to Assange. Technically it didn't come from the Russians.

And yet there is no proof this actually happened. It's all hearsay.  Why wouldnt the DNC let the FBI investigate their hack? Why did they turn it over to a private party? Because apparently they have something to hide. It will be great when this all comes back on the DNC. Then Hillary gets investigated and thrown in a dark cold cell.

[Willow]

OK, but my original question is, if the guy who leaked the e-mails, said it wasn't the Russians who gave them to him, what is the whole Russia-U.S. Election investigation all about?  What else did Russia supposedly do? 

I keep hearing about intelligence from all over that says Russia hacked our election.  But I haven't heard about any hacking, other than what Wiki released. 

If the Russians hacked the info and turned it over to an intermediary who sent it to Assange. Technically it didn't come from the Russians.

And yet there is no proof this actually happened. It's all hearsay pure speculation.  Why wouldnt the DNC let the FBI investigate their hack? Why did they turn it over to a private party? Because apparently they have something to hide. It will be great when this all comes back on the DNC. Then Hillary gets investigated and thrown in a dark cold cell.

Fixed it for you, Gavin.     You're welcome.

[Gavin_Sons]

OK, but my original question is, if the guy who leaked the e-mails, said it wasn't the Russians who gave them to him, what is the whole Russia-U.S. Election investigation all about?  What else did Russia supposedly do? 

I keep hearing about intelligence from all over that says Russia hacked our election.  But I haven't heard about any hacking, other than what Wiki released. 

If the Russians hacked the info and turned it over to an intermediary who sent it to Assange. Technically it didn't come from the Russians.

And yet there is no proof this actually happened. It's all hearsay pure speculation.  Why wouldnt the DNC let the FBI investigate their hack? Why did they turn it over to a private party? Because apparently they have something to hide. It will be great when this all comes back on the DNC. Then Hillary gets investigated and thrown in a dark cold cell.

Fixed it for you, Gavin.     You're welcome.

Thank you very kindly Willow. 

[Moonshot_1]

OK, but my original question is, if the guy who leaked the e-mails, said it wasn't the Russians who gave them to him, what is the whole Russia-U.S. Election investigation all about?  What else did Russia supposedly do? 

I keep hearing about intelligence from all over that says Russia hacked our election.  But I haven't heard about any hacking, other than what Wiki released. 

If the Russians hacked the info and turned it over to an intermediary who sent it to Assange. Technically it didn't come from the Russians.

And yet there is no proof this actually happened. It's all hearsay pure speculation.  Why wouldnt the DNC let the FBI investigate their hack? Why did they turn it over to a private party? Because apparently they have something to hide. It will be great when this all comes back on the DNC. Then Hillary gets investigated and thrown in a dark cold cell.

Fixed it for you, Gavin.     You're welcome.

I believe if you change "pure" to "bogus" you will have fixed right proper.

[rocketray]

google"what part of the media do the Rothschilds own?"..watch on you tube "How to be  a crook"by Larken Rose....dig on "Themoneymasters.com"...do not fall for a left/right contrived BS

[..]

Assange rape charges dropped by Sweden.

[G-Man]

But the U.S. still wants him so he's prolly not going anywhere too quickly.

[rocketray]

google "what part of the media do the Rothschilds own"...then go to "themoneymasters.com"