Why the Trump Administration is after Julian Assange
Okay, I need you to be open minded for this. It's probably confusing for some of you as to why the Trump Admin wants JA to stand trial. I want you to consider the points I am making from a completely objective standpoint and try to at least temporarily let go of the bias you may have towards thinking Julian Assange (JA) is a good guy. Just consider him neutral for the purpose of this discussion.
First off, JA has published information that was detrimental to, and endangered the lives of the US military. Freedom of press doesn't cover you if you aid your source in illegally obtaining or leaking classified information. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/may/23/julian-assange-indicted-chelsea-manning-classified/
I will now focus on Seth Rich, since pretty much everyone here should know about this situation and I think that WE HAVE MORE THAN WE KNOW specifically on this topic.
My first problem is: Why wouldn't JA say whether or not Rich was his source? What possible reason could he have for not doing so? I thought he was supposed to be sticking it to the evil people in the world but he won't say that Rich was his source? Why wouldn't he say that Rich was his source, giving investigators motive to look into if that were the case? Many of us believe that Rich WAS his source but I'm going to present some information that could possibly indicate that this isn't the case.
-
Let's get the big one out of the way. The transfer rate. We all know that the transfer rate from the metadata of the files released by WikiLeaks indicates that it was transferred to a USB/SSD drive. HOWEVER, this does NOT mean that the USB or SSD that was handed over to WikiLeaks contains info taken directly from the SOURCE. Example: You hack the DNC. You now have all of the files on your computer. You then transfer the files to a USB/SSD. What will the metadata say the transfer rate was?
-
Does the Russiagate narrative ever get off the ground if the WikiLeaks document dumps do not occur? NO. The WikiLeaks dumps were one of the major points of the investigation into the Trump campaign and they were accused of colluding with WikiLeaks in partnership with the Russians. The WikiLeaks dump was used as "evidence" of the "Russian Hack" BY THE DEEP STATE.
I believe that Seth Rich was murdered by the DS, not because he leaked the documents, but because they needed to make us THINK that Rich leaked the documents. I believe that it is highly likely that JA is working with the Deep State and that it was the DS that gave him the documents in order to hurt Trump and give merit to the Russiagate hoax. This explains why he won't say one way or the other if Rich was his source. If he says that Rich WAS the source, then investigators have probable cause to start an investigation into his murder as being politically motivated. If he says that Rich WASN'T the source, then everyone would be wondering WHO GAVE HIM THE DOCUMENTS AND WHY. Furthermore, was there actually anything good in the leak? Did we acquire any information that was detrimental to the Deep State? Not that I'm aware of, at least anything really big.
It's extremely important to always remain objective because your bias that comes from your belief of which "side" people are on will taint all of the information you take in and render you incapable of finding the truth. There is so much stuff to go back over that paints things in a different light than many here believe if you are capable of being objective and thinking for yourself. We really do have more than we know. It's all out there just waiting to be put together. I believe that Seth Rich was murdered by the Deep State as nothing more than a smoke screen to start the Russiagate narrative. These people are sick.