That appears to be the bar now where this administration is concerned.
Even when it is they see violations no one else can find.
Well, apparently he had already claimed that it wasn’t Russia, was offered a pardon to keep saying it wasn’t Russia, being a man of honor declined to accept the pardon, and kept saying it wasn’t Russia.
Makes sense.
I note that this is all in conjunction with an extradition hearing to the US. Waiting for claim that we can’t send him to a land controlled by someone who wanted to conspire with him.
1 Like
Sadly that makes as much sense as all the conspiracy nut BS the left has been peddling for over 3 years now.
1 Like
Ahh, so colluding with Russia to win elections is just fine, you just need the good ones, got it.
2 Likes
Yet you just indicated that the White House needs to disprove it.
No, ALL the burden is on Assange.
1 Like
Have him take the stand based on what? You think we should start putting members of congress on “the stand” based on the uncorroborated accusations of a known criminal? Psst, not going to happen.
And in what case?
The case, if we believe Assange, of Trump trying to offer him a pardon if he actually had evidence of who did the deed. Odd case. Who wouldn’t? I sure haven’t seen any actual evidence to date.
Hes. Not a member of Congress anymore. I think.
Yes…put them on the stand if their is enough evidence to justify it.
You think being a member of congress gets you out of things? Please.
I think it gets you out of being put on the stand for a non-crime, yes.
No, I mean court case.
You don’t just get up on the stand and give statements under oath absent some sort of a case being tried.
It kept Schifty from having to testify under oath.
I know, I was agreeing with you.
From Dana Rohrabacher’s statement posted:
“I was on my own fact finding mission at personal expense to find out information I thought was important to our country.”
“However, when speaking with Julian Assange, I told him that if he could provide me information and evidence about who actually gave him the DNC emails, I would then call on President Trump to pardon him. At no time did I offer a deal made by the President, nor did I say I was representing the President. Upon my return, I spoke briefly with Gen. Kelly. I told him that Julian Assange would provide information about the purloined DNC emails in exchange for a pardon. No one followed up with me including Gen. Kelly and that was the last discussion I had on this subject with anyone representing Trump or in his Administration.”
“Even though I wasn’t successful in getting this message through to the President I still call on him to pardon Julian Assange, who is the true whistleblower of our time.”
It was so important that he travelled using his own money to interview Assange. He had a brief conversation with Gen. Kelly. No one followed up with him and he didn’t have another conversation with anyone.
How remarkable is it that having used his own money because it was, in his opinion, “important to our country” he did not follow up with anyone?
Read his statement that has been posted on this thread. It is truly remarkable with the inconsistencies contained therein.
Um there is a thing called being a witness…
Seems Assange is saying he has one.
Not sure what you are on about…
No it didnt…the senate didnt vote for witnesses and thus he didnt. Had they he would have. Unless Robert’s overruled. .
Who is Erika Thompson?
Given the way Assange has been treated over the last four years, and taking into account the way Flynn was pressured to confess to a crime he did not commit in order to impugn Trump by association , I’d consider Assange’s contemporary testimony being used by MSM to impugn Trump, suspect.
She sounds hot…
