[Sans-Culotte]

Yesterday this story was being presented as if Trump was willing to pardon Assange if he said the Russians did not hack the server. Today's version is that he offered the pardon for proof that the Russians did not hack the server.

[DoodleDawg]

Today's version is that he offered the pardon for proof that the Russians did not hack the server.

Actually today's version is Rohrabacher said he could get the pardon without ever actually talked to Trump about what he was promising, either before or after he promised it. Nowhere in this story did Trump actually say he'd pardon Assange. It's all a figment of Rohrabacher's imagination. And Assange fell for it.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Today’s version is that a congressman offered a pardon, not Trump. There is no evidence Trump was ever even presented with the proposal.

[wattsgnu]

Excellent point. Media lies change entire meaning. Add in that it wasn’t even from Trump (as in ‘Trump offers a pardon’ vs Rohrabacher offers’) and this is a big nothingburger as usual.

[Alberta's Child]

Your post is absolutely critical here. Most people never picked up on the important distinction between the two.

[ManHunter]

“...Rohrabacher said his goal during the meeting was to find proof for a widely debunked conspiracy theory: that WikiLeaks’ real source for the DNC emails was not Russian intelligence agents, as U.S. officials have since concluded, but former DNC staffer Seth Rich...”

In other words, he was seeking the truth. How dare he?!