Of course Clinton ordered her surrogates to punish Assange for contributing to her defeat:
Hillary Clinton has to settle for revenge because she failed to execute Assange when she had the chance:
Hillary’s campaign staff began handing out ear plugs instead of campaign buttons when this article first appeared:
Tucker Carlson is getting a jump on media ethics before the circus comes to town:
collusion (noun)
A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose. See synonyms at conspiracy.
El Rushbo identifies collusion without mentioning Julian Assange:
RUSH: If there were real journalism in America today, there would be questions right now that these real journalists would really want to ask people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, such as, “President Obama, were you made aware of spying on the Trump campaign while you were in office?”
“President Obama, are you shocked at the possibility of spying on a political campaign in post-Watergate America?” “President Obama, are you supportive of Attorney General Barr’s efforts to fully investigate the reasons for this spying?” “President Obama, if FISA courts were deceived in any way by your FBI, would you characterize that as a scandal — and, if not, how would you characterize it?” “President Obama, when you said that you learned about Hillary Clinton’s secret email server by reading about it in the papers, were you being honest, sir?
“Because we know that you sent her emails on that server knowing full-fledged that it had an address that was outside the State Department.” “President Obama, looking back, are you shocked that the secretary of state would create and maintain a private, poorly secured email server that processed top secret documents for her entire term?” “President Obama, was President Trump correct in his assessment that he was surveilled by your administration?”
Now, for Mrs. Clinton — and you might even think of some better ones for Obama. “Mrs. Clinton, when did you first read the Steele dossier that you paid for?” “Mrs. Clinton, what was your reaction when you saw BuzzFeed actually publish the dossier despite their admission that it had not been verified or corroborated? Did you feel successful?” “As a former first lady, senator, and secretary of state, you are familiar with investigative reports from intelligence agencies. Were you fooled by the information in the Steele dossier? Did you believe what was in the Steele dossier?
“Did you pay for what you knew was not verifiable or corroborate-able in the Steele dossier?” “Who in your organization gave the Perkins Coie law firm the assignment to secure the dossier from Fusion GPS, and were you aware of the assignment?” “If the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and Director of National Intelligence abused their powers, spying on and undermining the Trump campaign, transition, and presidency, would you condemn those actions?”
“Mrs. Clinton, are you at all worried that the Steele dossier can be tied to your campaign and that it was thus knowingly used to secure four fraudulent FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, or did you feel like it was an eminently successful political operation?” I have to take a break. There are obviously a plethora of questions you could create. But the point is, there isn’t one ounce of curiosity from any reporter anywhere (in the Drive-By side of things) in any of this.
As far back as 2010 I said Americans should have been concerned with INTERPOL’s involvement in the WikiLeak Affair cum freedom of the press:
I am not worried about espionage, media ethics, Julian Assange’s morality, or any of the amateur-lawyer chitchat that is popping up faster than a teenager’s zits. One does not have to become immersed in legalese to know that INTERPOL had no business in our First Amendment or our courts.
Why am I bringing it up? Answer: Because the Chicago sewer rat gave INTERPOL a toe hold on our First Amendment as well as our courts:
Finally, the evidence shows that the FBI in Obama’s Administration was there to protect, defend, and promote Hillary Clinton’s morality:
Both Satan and Hillary’s laugh come with the painful screams of millions of babies ripped from their mother’s wombs and with those yet to come.
The uproarious laughs of both Satan and Clinton rose to a creepy crescendo Friday when the FBI put into action the most effective way to take public attention away from the revelations of James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas and Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks.
The masses whose lives will be most impacted by the outcome of Election 2016 should never look for Lie Relief from an FBI under the control of America-hating President Barack Hussein Obama for, lo these past eight years.
Where has the FBI been for the past eight years up to 11 days before Election?
You know the answer.
The truth is that not only has the FBI of the day managed to take public attention away from O’Keefe and Assange—but has managed to put the name Hillary Clinton in neon lights front and centre 11 day before election.
Wake up call! FBI Not There to Save Us from Hillary
By Judi McLeod
October 29, 2016
http://canadafreepress.com/article/wake-up-call-fbi-not-there-to-save-us-from-hillary
Washington (CNN)Hillary Clinton said Thursday that Julian Assange -- whose organization, WikiLeaks, played a damaging role in her 2016 electoral defeat -- needs to "answer for what he has done."
Hillary Clinton says Assange 'has to answer for what he has done'
By Julie Gallagher, CNN
Updated 12:31 AM ET, Fri April 12, 2019
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/hillary-clinton-julian-assange-arrest/index.html
By Julie Gallagher, CNN
Updated 12:31 AM ET, Fri April 12, 2019
https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/11/politics/hillary-clinton-julian-assange-arrest/index.html
Hillary Clinton has to settle for revenge because she failed to execute Assange when she had the chance:
When she was secretary of state in 2010, did Hillary Clinton once suggest silencing WikiLeaks whistleblower Julian Assange by executing him with a planned drone strike?
“Can’t we just drone this guy?” Clinton asked during a State Department meeting, according to a report from the True Pundit blog that was tweeted by the whistleblower organization WikiLeaks Monday.
“Can’t we just drone this guy?” Clinton asked during a State Department meeting, according to a report from the True Pundit blog that was tweeted by the whistleblower organization WikiLeaks Monday.
Did Hillary suggest 'droning' WikiLeaks founder?
Posted By -NO AUTHOR- On 10/03/2016 @ 7:57 pm
https://www.wnd.com/2016/10/did-hillary-suggest-droning-wikileaks-founder/
Posted By -NO AUTHOR- On 10/03/2016 @ 7:57 pm
https://www.wnd.com/2016/10/did-hillary-suggest-droning-wikileaks-founder/
Hillary’s campaign staff began handing out ear plugs instead of campaign buttons when this article first appeared:
Wikileaks will publish ‘enough evidence’ to indict Hillary Clinton, warns Assange
Published time: 13 Jun, 2016 18:47
Edited time: 13 Jun, 2016 21:15
https://www.rt.com/usa/346534-wikileaks-clinton-assange-fbi/
Published time: 13 Jun, 2016 18:47
Edited time: 13 Jun, 2016 21:15
https://www.rt.com/usa/346534-wikileaks-clinton-assange-fbi/
Tucker Carlson is getting a jump on media ethics before the circus comes to town:
collusion (noun)
A secret agreement between two or more parties for a fraudulent, illegal, or deceitful purpose. See synonyms at conspiracy.
El Rushbo identifies collusion without mentioning Julian Assange:
RUSH: If there were real journalism in America today, there would be questions right now that these real journalists would really want to ask people like Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, such as, “President Obama, were you made aware of spying on the Trump campaign while you were in office?”
“President Obama, are you shocked at the possibility of spying on a political campaign in post-Watergate America?” “President Obama, are you supportive of Attorney General Barr’s efforts to fully investigate the reasons for this spying?” “President Obama, if FISA courts were deceived in any way by your FBI, would you characterize that as a scandal — and, if not, how would you characterize it?” “President Obama, when you said that you learned about Hillary Clinton’s secret email server by reading about it in the papers, were you being honest, sir?
“Because we know that you sent her emails on that server knowing full-fledged that it had an address that was outside the State Department.” “President Obama, looking back, are you shocked that the secretary of state would create and maintain a private, poorly secured email server that processed top secret documents for her entire term?” “President Obama, was President Trump correct in his assessment that he was surveilled by your administration?”
Now, for Mrs. Clinton — and you might even think of some better ones for Obama. “Mrs. Clinton, when did you first read the Steele dossier that you paid for?” “Mrs. Clinton, what was your reaction when you saw BuzzFeed actually publish the dossier despite their admission that it had not been verified or corroborated? Did you feel successful?” “As a former first lady, senator, and secretary of state, you are familiar with investigative reports from intelligence agencies. Were you fooled by the information in the Steele dossier? Did you believe what was in the Steele dossier?
“Did you pay for what you knew was not verifiable or corroborate-able in the Steele dossier?” “Who in your organization gave the Perkins Coie law firm the assignment to secure the dossier from Fusion GPS, and were you aware of the assignment?” “If the FBI, DOJ, CIA, and Director of National Intelligence abused their powers, spying on and undermining the Trump campaign, transition, and presidency, would you condemn those actions?”
“Mrs. Clinton, are you at all worried that the Steele dossier can be tied to your campaign and that it was thus knowingly used to secure four fraudulent FISA warrants to spy on the Trump campaign, or did you feel like it was an eminently successful political operation?” I have to take a break. There are obviously a plethora of questions you could create. But the point is, there isn’t one ounce of curiosity from any reporter anywhere (in the Drive-By side of things) in any of this.
Questions Real Journalists Would Ask Obama and Hillary
Apr 11, 2019
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/...real-journalists-would-ask-obama-and-hillary/
Apr 11, 2019
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/...real-journalists-would-ask-obama-and-hillary/
As far back as 2010 I said Americans should have been concerned with INTERPOL’s involvement in the WikiLeak Affair cum freedom of the press:
WikiLeaks: Interpol issues wanted notice for Julian Assange
David Leigh, Luke Harding, Afua Hirsch and Ewen MacAskill
Tue 30 Nov 2010 17.19 EST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/no v/30/ inter pol-wanted-notice-j u li an-assange
David Leigh, Luke Harding, Afua Hirsch and Ewen MacAskill
Tue 30 Nov 2010 17.19 EST
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/no v/30/ inter pol-wanted-notice-j u li an-assange
I am not worried about espionage, media ethics, Julian Assange’s morality, or any of the amateur-lawyer chitchat that is popping up faster than a teenager’s zits. One does not have to become immersed in legalese to know that INTERPOL had no business in our First Amendment or our courts.
Why am I bringing it up? Answer: Because the Chicago sewer rat gave INTERPOL a toe hold on our First Amendment as well as our courts:
Last Thursday, December 17, 2009, The White House released an Executive Order "Amending Executive Order 12425." It grants INTERPOL (International Criminal Police Organization) a new level of full diplomatic immunity afforded to foreign embassies and select other "International Organizations" as set forth in the United States International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945.
By removing language from President Reagan's 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates - now operates - on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
By removing language from President Reagan's 1983 Executive Order 12425, this international law enforcement body now operates - now operates - on American soil beyond the reach of our own top law enforcement arm, the FBI, and is immune from Freedom Of Information Act (FOIA) requests.
Wither Sovereignty
Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America - Is The ICC Next?
By Steve Schippert, Clyde Middleton December 23, 2009
http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/wither-sovereignty/
Executive Order Amended to Immunize INTERPOL In America - Is The ICC Next?
By Steve Schippert, Clyde Middleton December 23, 2009
http://threatswatch.org/analysis/2009/12/wither-sovereignty/
Finally, the evidence shows that the FBI in Obama’s Administration was there to protect, defend, and promote Hillary Clinton’s morality:
Both Satan and Hillary’s laugh come with the painful screams of millions of babies ripped from their mother’s wombs and with those yet to come.
The uproarious laughs of both Satan and Clinton rose to a creepy crescendo Friday when the FBI put into action the most effective way to take public attention away from the revelations of James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas and Julian Assange’s WikiLeaks.
The masses whose lives will be most impacted by the outcome of Election 2016 should never look for Lie Relief from an FBI under the control of America-hating President Barack Hussein Obama for, lo these past eight years.
Where has the FBI been for the past eight years up to 11 days before Election?
You know the answer.
The truth is that not only has the FBI of the day managed to take public attention away from O’Keefe and Assange—but has managed to put the name Hillary Clinton in neon lights front and centre 11 day before election.
Wake up call! FBI Not There to Save Us from Hillary
By Judi McLeod
October 29, 2016
http://canadafreepress.com/article/wake-up-call-fbi-not-there-to-save-us-from-hillary
