TY Baker!!!

>>3920933 (lb)

>>3920941 (lb)

>>3920949 (lb)

>>3920997 (lb)

Heroes aren't born, they are cornered.

Theory here:

https://twitter.com/Diamethious/status/1063243235462508544

CDAN post here:

https://www.crazydaysandnights.net/2018/07/blind-items-revealed-38.html

>>3921483 (lb)

You do realize that's a corrected version, right? Check the stamp at top of the original versus that one. It would be interesting to see how they corrected it if you have a pacer link to the new one. Here's the link to the original. You can see the date/time stamp. I'm not sure if these documents can be edited after they've been scanned/posted, but it sure seems like between yours and these, there were corrections made to them, reuploaded, and new timestamp in red.

Link to originals:

https://pacer-documents.s3.amazonaws.com/179/399086/18919235200.pdf

>>3921790

Notable last bread, then an anon came along and posted an updated version without a pacer link. Not sure where this is going, but here you go:

Original post:

3921153

Breakdown of that post:

>>3921296

Response from "Indictmentfag" of what appears to be a newer version (check the timestamp at the top right):

>>3921483

Baker removes (Not attacking!!! Love you baker):

>>3921490

My response:

>>3921717

And now you, and everyone that's linked to you so far:

>>3921790

And baker puts it back in (Thank you baker!!!):

>>3921858

Soooooooo

All that aside:

1. Looks like the original was valid as fuck.

2. They updated it.

3. Something's fucky.

>>3921980

>>3921938

>>3921936

Not an anagram. Not some hidden identity. The original document with the error (likely) occurred because it was a copy/paste error. The original indictment was a valid case against a real person. Some college kid that got caught doing something stupid or whatever:

https://m.facebook.com/msaumd/photos/a.258180474261395.61124.103550249724419/450956208317153

https://www.flickr.com/photos/mwbrelief/9193189288

Muslims Without Borders

Use google.

The clerical error, again, "likely" happened because the person was working multiple documents, and had "Assange" in memory for copy/paste. That means they were running through files, saw that name "Assange", went "OH MY FUCK WHAT'S THIS?!?!?!" and fucked up a document they were working on.

That means that the whole "JA Has an indictment and is going to give a testimony, etc." is going to happen.

>>3922006

No worries baker! Don't envy the job you guys do day in and day out. Tribute:

>>3922114

>>3922190

He's saying pretty much the same thing we've talked about. It was an error, and likely that this prosecutor would have been working similar stuff against JA, and that it's a copy/paste error.

That would explain the updated version of the doc that indictmentfag found:

>>3921483

Long/Short here:

>>3921975

>>3922251

I don't want to be the one that busts your bubble, anon, but you do realize that JA paid people in exchange for state secrets, right? It doesn't matter if those state secrets would implicate bad actors, it just means that "technically" it's borderline seditious (to a degree), perhaps even aiding those that would intend to harm a nation. Not to mention that you have to ask yourself "Has Wikileaks ever released anything that led to the endangerment and or death of American soldiers?".

But in the end, we already know the good guys got JA the asset, and already have all the NSA goods to back up whatever he may say in his testimony. That's the good news. The (potential) bad news is going to be finding out just how deep Julian Assange's rabbit hole goes. Either CDAN is right, or she's full of shit. If she's right, JA might get some egg in his eye before this is all said and done.

That, and:

>>3922259

>>3922299

That you know of.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1kVQwX9l9HJ5F76x05ic_YnU_Z5yiVS96LbzAOP66EzA/edit#gid=1525422677

There's at least a 1 in 60 thousand chance he does. Perhaps more. >>3922324

>>3922391

Yes, you pay per document on pacer. Our lawfags unlock them for us, and send out links because they are awesome like that.

Thanks, lawfags.