>>3919345 (lb)

Thanks. BTW fuck WSJ. I ain't paying no tree fiddy to read the full article. Kek

With JA being prosecuted wouldn't that mean he would have to turn in his findings into evidence? "How do you share what you already know into an investigation (legally)?"

>>3919460

Sorry Anon, I was quoting Q. So is the purpose of DOJ prosecuting Assange to basically make those 30,000 emails that Q team have public?