That's a weird move. Assange is, in a way, imprisoned in an embassy for years now It's not someone you can just pay a visit anonymously. So why did Manafort lie about this? Of course that sort of information comes to light, so why deny it in the first place?

Of course it's pretty convenient to notice that Russians visited as well, but again : it's an embassy. That doesn't really show anything. In any case: I hope it'll lead to something.

 

It doesn't help Hillary's case because Hillary Clinton is not dealing with any sort of lawsuit or investigation. She's not involved in Paul Manafort's (likely Trump-ordered) collusion with the Russians in any way. Can we just not with the whataboutism?

I do have a good reason for posting an update, though. Turns out Manafort's lawyers were talking to Trump's lawyers about Mueller's questions and the answers being given the entire time. Which means Trump very likely submitted a lot of written lies to Mueller based on what Manafort believed he was getting away with:

https://www.newsweek.com/trump-lawy...nafort-often-shared-mueller-questions-1234622

Mueller had requested a 10 day delay on Manafort's cooperation report so that he didn't have to reveal the fact that he was pulling the plea deal prior to Trump submitting written testimony. The real 4D chess right here. When the full investigation report drops, expect several counts of perjury and probably one or two counts of obstruction, in addition to either a collusion or conspiracy charge.

 

Snowden deserves a pardon because he brought valuable information to the public. Assange is essentially a foreign intelligence officer for exclusively Russian interests now, so fuck him. Last net positive thing Wikileaks released was the Panama Papers, and they were released elsewhere anyway.

 

Right after Wikileaks told them that it was a false news they altered the original publication without announcing to anyone they did.

First it was absolute certainty he coluded, then they altered it so that they can avoid repercussion if people find out the story is not true by saying we are not 100% sure but “sources” say.

Wikileaks bets 1 million they never met.
Manafort says story is not true.
Gaurdian altered original article.
Their sources is “unnamed” Code for its all made up.

So no evidence for anything. They don’t present it. And Wikileaks has an extremely good track record for truth. Everything they have said was true.

The media is manipulating you to hate Assange, this isn’t new. And I highly doubt it’s an honest mistake and correction. They do this all the time, they purposely generate fake news to get clicks, then they edit the story after.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/...ell-manafort-wikileaks-story-softens-language

— Posts automatically merged - Please don't double post! —

I’m talking about the fact that Hillary approved $80 billion in weapons deal to Saudi Arabia which allowed the Kingdom to carry out a war in Yemen. That caused food shortages and thousands to die.

She believe that Wallstreet would best mange the economy which contradicted her promises.

From 1,700 of her emails we found out she was the primary architect of the war in Libya. The war in Libya left things in chaos which gave rise to radical Jihadists and triggered huge migration to Europe.

These were some of the things wikileaks leaked that caused her to election.

 

Sucking the dick of your own fucked up intel/propaganda agencies just to score points online over Trump.

Noice.

 

https://foreignpolicy.com/2017/08/1...-government-during-u-s-presidential-campaign/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/wikileaks-hid-documents-showing-syrian-deposits-in-russian-bank

https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-russian-hackers-had-rnc-data-but-didnt-release-it

Assange himself admits that Wikileaks doesn't publish anything on Trump or the Republicans. His only excuse is that they "don't have anything more damaging than what comes out of his own mouth," but that's a poor excuse. If Wikileaks goal is transparency, then you're not going to get that by only publishing documents from specific political parties or countries.

 

For those articles it’s acussations without proof.

The articles mentions that Russians hacked both the DNC and the RNC, but we know that there was no Russian hack.

They were leaked because Podesta replied to an Email and gave his password away. This wasn’t a high profile hack. That’s him not being careful. Yet Hillary knows this and still blamed that Russia hacked and gave the emails to Assange without any proof.

It’s just scapegoating. And it makes me supicious that the article mentions Russians hacked both the DNC and the RNC, when they didn’t even give the DNC emails to Assange to begin with. So what makes me think they did the same with the RNC.

Assange himself said those claims of missing Emails are false. It clearly says that in the Article you linked. And he threatened the Daily Dot with retaliation for posting false claims.

I’m only saying why Hilary lost. I remember specifically people say they would rather vote Trump, even many Bernie Supporters. Me saying why Hillary lost doesn’t mean I support everything Trump. I’m only giving reason why people did.

I never stated you specifically that you are just slandering, I’m specifically talking about the Democratic politicians which I see seperate from the voters.

It’s slandering because it’s accusations without proof. They been trying to ruin this mans reputation and trying to get people to turn on him without any evidence for their accusations. It’s Russia this and Russia that.

I already stated my source Wikileaks.

 

then change your preferences so they won't show up

 

https://nypost.com/2018/11/28/trump-says-pardon-for-paul-manafort-still-a-possibility/

 

There's no discussion to be had here if we can't agree on the facts, and we obviously can't. Every US intelligence agency confirmed that it was state-sponsored Russian hackers that went after the DNC/RNC. Specifically the GRU. At the time, everybody was trying to portray these hackers as "Guccifer 2.0," including Roger Stone who is likely now facing indictment from the Mueller investigation. His associate, Jerome Corsi, is expecting to spend the rest of his life in jail after rejecting a supposed plea deal.

https://nypost.com/2018/11/29/roger...-corsi-i-might-die-in-jail-for-helping-trump/

In any case, we know Trump has been getting played like a fiddle by Mueller throughout this investigation, and the noose is now starting to tighten:

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profil...eller-just-played-donald-trump-like-a-fiddle/

We're going to see indictments for all that "nothing" Trump has done soon enough, so just be patient.



EDIT: Just as I say that, there's new information today. Turns out Trump was planning to build a tower in Moscow, and these plans were being made during the 2016 campaign. Michael Cohen recently confessed to this:

https://wjla.com/news/nation-world/...-lawyer-is-making-a-surprise-court-appearance

Cohen also now has a plea agreement with the Mueller investigation, in addition to the plea agreement he had with the Southern district of New York.