X Privacy & Cookies This site uses cookies. By continuing, you agree to their use. Learn more, including how to control cookies. Got It!

Advertisements

Today most of the headlines are reading that Julian Assange’s lawyers stated that Assange was offered a pardon if he testified that Russia didn’t steal the DNC leaks. All the MSM is having a field day with this claiming that Trump offered it on the condition that Assange help “cover-up” the Russian hacking. The problem with these articles is it simply isn’t true. Assange stated months before in January of 2017 that he did not receive the emails from Russia. (For a video with Hannity where he states this see here. or a video with John Pilger https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_sbT3_9dJY4).

Interviews and articles dating back to when January of 2017 prove that Assange was already stating he didn’t receive the emails and leaks from Russia. According to the headlines today, Dana Rohrabacher offered the pardon to Julian Assange on his visit. The problem with it is that Rohrabacher didn’t visit Assange until August of 2017. So, Assange was already stating Russia didn’t give him the info months before, as seen in the Wikileaks tweet below).

Of course, the White House insists that Trump does not even know Rohrabacher and no such offer was made. The MSM needs to get this right. First Trump tried to coerce Assange with a pardon when that didn’t work, he had him indicted.

Assange did not want to be pardoned because it would be an admission of guilt. What matters to Assange was the effect it would have on free speech and free press. Rand Paul suggested Assange be given immunity if he was willing to testify in this case. (Article can be seen here.) This is a totally different scenario than what MSM is trying to produce. Finally, Trump has remained silent on the extradition of Assange after saying he loved Wikileaks 150 times pre-election. He claims now that Wikileaks is not his thing

So, since the White House is denying offering Assange a pardon, the question you must ask yourself is who is lying? Let’s look at the evidence of Trump talking about Wikileaks. Here is a youtube video showing Trump pre-election:

Then in April, after Assange was brutally kidnapped from the Embassy and arrested, Trump said the following according to washington post article:

But on Thursday, after the Justice Department unsealed an indictment charging Assange for actions stemming from WikiLeaks’ 2010 publication of classified diplomatic and military documents, Trump acted as if he’d never heard of the anti-secrecy group.“I know nothing about WikiLeaks. It’s not my thing,” Trump told reporters in the Oval Office. “I know there is something having to do with Julian Assange.” Wait… what? So, who is the liar in this? How can you love something and not know nothing about it? His statement is recorded by many MSM articles if you would like to see. https://www.politico.com/story/2019/04/11/trump-julian-assange-wikileaks-1269954 https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/wikileaks-donald-trump-julian-assange-campaign/index.html https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/apr/12/hatred-love-cold-indifference-julian-assange-trump-wikileaks Sadly, even the Guardian calls out the obvious lie. It’s either Trump is lying or he has a memory issue. If the case is his memory, then he doesn’t belong in the oval office in my opinion. My point being, if you lied about loving Wikileaks when they were exposing your opponent, why wouldn’t you lie now? Here is another question I ask you the reader, are the indictments against Assange revenge for him refusing to be coerced or are they an attack on a free press or both? The trial starting next Tuesday should be interesting, to say the least. I think we are in for an explosive amount of details that most never heard before. Hopefully, it ends with a free Julian Assange.