Trump’s Attorneys Make Solid Case For Freeing Julian Assange in Legal Filing

a reply to: purplemer

That doesn't answer the question as to the purpose of this story.

Even if everything you say is true and this story was never published what would have changed?

You are fooling yourself.

a reply to: daskakik

Define yourself better and i will try. The purpose of the story as i can see is to put a false public image to events that have already taken place. (The fact he is no longer in the embassy)

That makes sense to me if i does not to you then fair enough. I dont come here to try and change peoples opionions. I come to share information and to learn.

originally posted by: purplemer
Define yourself better and i will try. The purpose of the story as i can see is to put a false public image to events that have already taken place. (The fact he is no longer in the embassy)

What for? If he is in protective custody then they don't need to put a false public image 4 days after he was brought in.

That makes sense to me if i does not to you then fair enough. I dont come here to try and change peoples opionions. I come to share information and to learn.

It makes sense to you because you are not here to learn but to engage in confirmation bias.

Yup he deserves to be a free man.


He is not a US citizen nor did he release any material while in the US, he owes the USA no loyalty.

Usa should punish those who did the leaking to him in the first place.

a reply to: purplemer

Hell yeah. Best president in my lifetime so far.

These are his actions.

Also, Thank god for wikileaks.

a reply to: daskakik

What for? If he is in protective custody then they don't need to put a false public image 4 days after he was brought in.

There are too different narratives to follow. Both giving very different news. If you cannot see and define this in your own head you will not understand the reason for these actions.

Do you understand that there are two narrartives. (One the msm - fake news) and another underlying story which is not being covered by the fake news which involves the purg of some very naughty people to a nice little holiday camp in gitmo.

a reply to: purplemer

I can follow both. That doesn't mean that this action makes sense in either of them.

You can't explain how it would make sense in either of them.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: purplemer

I can follow both. That doesn't mean that this action makes sense in either of them.

You can't explain how it would make sense in either of them.

I have been on ATS long enough to understand how people debate or attempt derail.

You are choosing to be obtuse and pretend not to understand the sense I am making. I have entrained you but can clearly see what you are attempting to do. So as I said in my other thread.

Trot on.

a reply to: purplemer

I follow your argument but disagree with your conclusion.

It doesn't make sense to put up a public image if he is already in protective custody. You can't explain why that would be needed. Telling me to trot on is just a way to avoid having to make a valid argument.

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: purplemer

I follow your argument but disagree with your conclusion.

It doesn't make sense to put up a public image if he is already in protective custody. You can't explain why that would be needed. Telling me to trot on is just a way to avoid having to make a valid argument.

If you can follow my argument then you are capable of answering the question yourself. If you follow the idea there are two narratives then answer this question:

Why do you think there are two narratives.

Would be funny if he was free to roam around GITMO under full body protection drinking "my ties" while the freaks of the HRC clan we're locked up there watching in pure hatred. Adding insult to injury, damn that would be a great sight to see.

a reply to: purplemer

There are more than two narratives (at least in this thread) the MSM's, yours and JA still in the embassy.

This story doesn't validate or invalidate any of them.

Why would the second narrative even exist? The swamp drainers don't need you or any "woke" tin foil hat wearers to "know" to carry out their duties.

Based on the article, what this is saying to me is this: Trump wants to drop the entire case against Assange, and is working to remove the extradition order that the US has on the man. However, he can not leave the place he is at the Embassy right now, as Sweden still have an extradition order on him. So that country too would have to drop its case for him to leave the embassy and live as a free man.

Now that being said, there are a few things to consider, and that is that right now Trump does not care and is appearing to back the man. However, what Assange releases things about or on Trump or his family, will he still be willing to seek to drop the extradition order on Assange?

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Did we all forget that Assange offered to go to the US if Manning was freed, and then Manning was set free, by Obama to boot?

Why all this time to get someone, who supposedly was more than willing, in custody.

a reply to: daskakik

If you fail to state the facts correctly like in your above post you are either misinformed or spreading misinformation..

:-)

a reply to: sdcigarpig

Sweden still have an extradition order on him. So that country too would have to drop its case for him to leave the embassy and live as a free man.

No Sweeden does not have an extradition order on him. It has been dropped due to lack of evidence.

a reply to: purplemer

How about you correct me?

Here is where I got my info: It's up to America now, says Julian Assange on extradition offer

a reply to: daskakik

There are more than two narratives (at least in this thread) the MSM's, yours and JA still in the embassy.

You are clearly confused. I told you that you didnt understand what I was saying. You should have listened.

The narrative about him being in the embassy is the same as the MSM and no these second story is not just mine. It is a shared narrative.

This is much bigger the WL and JA and really i have no want to try and make you see this story. You clearly cannot be asked to research or look for yourself.

Fine by me. Your choice and loss.

see ya



So

a reply to: purplemer

I'm not confused I am just not putting much effort into responding to you because it is hardly worth it.

The second narrative is the one you brought up with this thread, regardless of who you share it with.

I have researched enough to now that there is nothing to indicate with any certainty that assange has left the embassy. Even if he has, nothing shows what that could really mean. All this swamp and storm talk is just your wishful thinking.

No problem, I'll probably be here next year asking "where's the beef" and my fellow CTers will probably continue chanting "the end is nigh".

originally posted by: daskakik
a reply to: purplemer

How about you correct me?

Here is where I got my info: It's up to America now, says Julian Assange on extradition offer

Happy to do so one last time and in doing so please learn that it is important to do some research before posting.


What was said in the artice was this.

He appeared to be suggesting that the next move in the long-running saga would be a tactical one, but that it was not his to make. He did not rule out going to the US “under certain circumstances”.

...and as julian said in his own words these circumstances where not met. Now why dont you go and find out for yourself what these unmet circumstances where. So that next time you post you you dont make another misinformed post.

Your point is again mute!

Keep trotting!