I am no legal expert and haven't the time to dig on this, but I wonder how they are going to reconcile 'coordinating' now with the NYT and Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. Am I to believe that the NYT just found all that classified material stacked up on their doorstep?
Of course the party labels of all involved are reversed and we know that the Dems and their cohorts are not subject to the same laws as the rest of us.
I think these indictments over shadow the one in his home county, so the US gets him next because of the large amount of charges. This could very well be a means of getting him out safely to the US, but what do I know lol...
The distinction they are trying to make is that they are claiming that Assange conspired with Bradley to steal US government documents. That’s illegal. Publishing information that is stolen, but which you had nothing to do with procuring, is what the Supreme Court ruled was allowed under the 1st Amendment in the Ellsberg case. I disagree with the reasoning of that case, and maybe it could stand to be reviewed by a better court, but even under that case, Assange could be liable.
HOWEVER, it is my understanding from some of the articles I have read that the conspiracy claim against Assange is a stretch, and that the government could well fail in proving that aspect, which would let Assange off the hook.
I hope Trump and Q are on top of the derps who are hot to put the screws to Assange. Maybe they are the ones bringing the charges, in order to get him over here from the UK so we can protect him. Or could be the DS stooges trying to get their hooks into him. We don’t know yet.
Under protection.
Threat is real.
Key to DNC 'source' 'hack' '187'.
Q
Bagster's interp;
Julian Assange is under protection.
The threat to him is real.
Assange is the key to the DNC 'source/hack' who was murdered [187] (Seth Rich)