trending seth rich
- Thread starter Rdcldad
- Start date
Does it hurt to cite that document that utterly failed to deliver what you were promised?
I am not citing Nancy Pelosi, and as bad as she might be I think it goes a little too far to call her a document.
So I’m not sure about the source for this info but I’m sure @07pilt can explain how it’s in error, or if not, how I’m wrong in concluding that the FBI relied on a report from CrowdStrike - that had been edited by DNC counsel...... (Perkins Coie?)
You guys are really good at computers, huh? I debunked this like a year ago when a drunk viking was talking about it.
In the Mueller report that you haven't read it lists the evidence number of the server imagine that they FBI used for its investigation.So I’m not sure about the source for this info but I’m sure @07pilt can explain how it’s in error, or if not, how I’m wrong in concluding that the FBI relied on a report from CrowdStrike - that had been edited by DNC counsel...... (Perkins Coie?)
If one of the primary mandates of the Mueller investigation was to investigate Russian interference and the Russians supposedly hacked the DNC and gave the information to Wikileaks why did the Mueller team not interview Julian Assange or subpoena Wikileaks?
Strange way to investigate considering the number of subpoenas and interviews that was directed at everything Trump.
CrowdStrike is the source of all of the FBI's material on the DNC hack, including the server images.
What?
How does investing how Wikileaks obtained illegally obtained information violate the first amendment? Especially if it does not involve punishing them for publishing the information.
Did the special counsel's subpoena power extend to a foreign citizen claiming asylum in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London for the past 7 years?
Could a lawyer tackle that one for me?
It is constitutionally controversial whether the press (wikipedia) can be asked to give up confidential sources.
Isn't that a moot point if no mechanism existed through which to compel him to sit for an interview?
Mueller wrapped on 3/22/19.
Assange was not removed from asylum until 4/11/19.
What if Assange would have spoken to Mueller's team voluntarily?
If my aunt had balls, she'd be my uncle?
Seriously, though, where's the upside in it for him?
And how do we know he wasn't asked?
Do you really think Mueller's team would have asked him for an interview and not included that detail in their 448 page report?
Upside for who? Assange? Doesn't he have charges in the US? It's not a novel thing to trade information for leniency.
Probably not, fair point.
Did this special counsel even have the authority to negotiate such a swap?
What is the benefit of receiving leniency in the US as long as he is protected by asylum and also facing charges in Sweden?
He was willing to go on Sean Hannity and talk to millions of people but he's not willing to talk to Mueller when he is trying to avoid exactly what has happened to him. It defies credulity.
Do the British or other governments not cooperate with American investigations? Does anyone believe the intelligence agencies have not been all over Wilileaks communications or the Russians for that matter?
There is no doubt if Mueller wanted forensic proof of how the stolen DNC emails showed up at Wilileaks they could find that out.
I think it is a total lack of curiosity that they do not know.
