Okay. Here are my thoughts on the emails. They weren't sensational. They were illegal. It is not legal to communicate like that IF you have a clearance and everyone who has a clearance knows it. But she got out of it. Nothing Assange has ever said or did turned out to be sensational beyond the fact that he released the collateral damage videos. But here's the thing, look at everyone around him. Everyone. He's the luckiest useful idiot or an asset. Everyone else is dead except Manning and Manning is so broken I wouldn't know where to start. The Pamela Anderson visit really gave him away. He could have refused. Everyone tied to Heffner was or is an asset and that is real whether people want to admit it or not. So you're thinking, so what? Hear me out. When 2016 rolled around I thought Trump was a straw man. Period. I had a few friends who really liked him but I could not be swayed. Straw man. Yawn. But he worried me because I did not want the Clintons. So I kept a close eye on him. Through a series of events too long for a brief reply I ended up 50 minutes away from one of his speaking events. I went. Trump said and did things that stood out. My opinion of Trump changed over time for very specific reasons. What does this have to do with Assange? Because Assange had dead man switches and files and everything else. Any man smart enough to stay alive would have been smart enough to drop the hammer. AND IF HE WAS REALLY stuck in an embassy he had nothing to lose. He would have known that. I truly believe he was there to prop up a narrative. It is the whole concept of the people in office tell you what they are doing so they can get away with it in broad daylight. The concept of collateral damage has always existed. The news needed ratings and people hated Bush and badda bing, there is your talking point for three years. You know how I really know it was bullshit, They made a movie about it with Helen Mirren, I have so much info Assange it's like PODedPatriot with Omidyar. If Assange made a deal to tell the truth then we'll see but he had more Russians going in and out of that Embassy than anyone. For the record, I think this is all show and I am putting my money on someone pulling a Jack Ruby as soon as he is stateside. We'll see, The Q drops about Snowden gave me the impression he was being hunted. That photo Q posted linked the people helping Snowden to pedos. Damning for sure. My opinion of those drops was: WE SEE YOU AND WE KNOW. But that is open to interpretation. Obviously. There were also drops naming Snowden and the ES drops. Everyone took the ES drops as Snowden but I thought it was Eric Schmidt. So that. Also I say this to people all of the time. You go and steal national secrets, dump them to media paid by globalists and go live in an enemy country and then see if they let your girlfriend join you six months later. Delusional. THAT would never happen. Real world, she is held indefinitely under the Patriot Act at an undisclosed location until she simply goes away. Assange yelled and fought leaving the embassy then sat quietly smiling in the transport. I dunno. My money is on he either tells the world something really useful or he gets Jack Ruby'd. We'll see. Clintonside? Maybe? I've thought about that but I don't get the impression it was the Clintons. Whoever bankrolled Assange was the one he reported too. Everyone around him died. That is extremely suspicious. Almost like they knew too much and told him and he told someone and bye bye. These fights for power aren't us versus them. It's like there are factions of people fighting for power and honestly for as crazy as he seemed Phil Schneider did an excellent job describing it. Then, Ecuador. Really? Of all embassies. The one where Father Crespi amassed his collection and Neil Armstrong went into caves looking for ancient civilizations. Ecuador always stood out to me as odd. The corruption, the secrecy, the history. I personally liked it when they asked the head of the embassy who he'd vote for if he could and he said, "Clinton." When people tell you who they are, believe them. Hard lesson for most people. I'm not saying I'm right but I am saying there is every reason to never trust Assange. I think we've all learned that headlines aren't made, they are bankrolled and when media outlets don't want to run the truth (which is always) they don't. Makes a high profile media darling like Assange look very, very suspicious.