A reminder: Once again, Ecuador has (again) flatly denied claims that Assange was going to be evicted. Same old pony show. He never once stepped out on that balcony since Pamela brought him lunch, citing “security reasons”. BULLSHIT. And the day after Pamela brought him lunch, his internet got cut. BULLSHIT. Now they pull him out like a fake osama, to make sure we believe he is there but we never get to see him and it always ends like this. BULLSHIT.I CALL TRIPLE BULLSHIT, Assange is as gone as Osama, who died from a lack of dialysis and subsequently lived for years until Obama took him out and I called it in 2016. How far ahead is that? It helped to have the big black van pull up the night after Pamela brought him lunch and remove Assange, and have it all live streamed – I fully expected the next day’s news be nothing but Assange not at the embassy anymore but NOPE – his internet was cut. That was the line they used.Do not forget: All 4 of the top people at Wikileaks that were not at the embassy died for various reasons in the two months before Pamela brought him lunch, and when Pamela brought him lunch I am surprised he ate it because it was well known at the time that she openly hated his guts. Now that he is gone, she’s his lover. YEP. And Wikileaks lives on as a deep state tool, oozing fakeness like Q, and solid proof: NO ACTION HAS EVER BEEN TAKEN ON RELEASES BY WIKILEAKS, OR Q SPEW, in fact, only the opposite has hit reality. Consider that.We will continue to hear stories of degrading health, near evictions, internet blackouts for Assange and whatever else, because they have to have something make people think he’s actually alive. Killing him was a very unpopular prospect, and the image of Wikileaks is just too good of a tool to throw away. Maybe he’ll eventually do a cameo on a deep fake, but as for now, we have seen NOTHING.

And the pictures sure look the part, he’s a smiling veggie boy now. No Wikileaks dead man switch either. TIME TO REMOVE ASSANGE FROM THE NEWS CYCLE BEFORE PEOPLE REALLY LOOK INTO THIS, WHAT CAN WE DO . . . . . HMMMMM I GOT IT! Let’s give France a taste of 911!

CONFIRMED: WIKILEAKS RELEASED NOTHING ZERO, ZIP, NADA, EVERYTHING EVERYONE IS CLAIMING IS THE DUMP IS STUFF THEY RELEASED LONG AGO, ALL COMPILED ONTO ONE LARGE PAGE. And that’s exactly what I’d expect if Wikileaks is, as I suspected, dead, and was dead before this latest Assange “arrest”.Here is what I really think went on: Assange got removed from the embassy on the night between October 16 and 17 2016. The live stream of this proved something went on the night after Pamela brought him that lunch. Ok, so what if it was spiked with pure psychedelic “whatever? ” Assange would be wrecked for the long haul but would survive. So messed up and delerious he’d think he was dying. Pamela herself said he was not feeling well after eating it. That’s a BIG red flag – probably a secret message to those in the know. He then agrees to be removed from the embassy. The black van takes him away, to a different location for a couple years, and Ecuador plays the game for a payoff while the CIA homogenizes his brain with a fruitcake cocktail for years. Then, when needed, (and recovered enough) they put him back in the embassy. He’s so messed up he really did smear poop on the walls, but not for more than a small time back, to stage the arrest, and Ecuador in exchange for going along with it for all this time, gets the 4+ billion payoff.If it is Assange and not a body double, this has to have been what happened, I was online posting during the live stream and said that night he was gone right when he was taken, plus said the next day he was gone and then his internet was “gone” and that was not a coincidence. The media at the time stated openly Pamela hated him and they were wondering why she’d buy him lunch. Then the “love story” kicked off and I called B.S. the entire time. Now he’s a clearly screwed up dude, whacked out of his mind when all the previous years did not make him whacked out of his mind. What happened during the last two and a half? NO BALCONY APPEARANCE, NOT EVEN A CAMEO?I know I am right about this, but feel it will be impossible to overcome the official lie this time. I think it was Assange in the photos, and they screwed him up GOOD. The Wikileaks saga is over. All we got was regurgitated crap in the “life insurance” release. This time, the deep state won.

Assange does not look right in the police van. SEE THIS. Compare photos.He aged too much, and his base persona is very different from photos, even “recent” 2016 photos. It is either not the same guy, or something horrible happened to him that tweaked his brain to a different world. Like lots of shock therapy or really bad psych drugs.

DUE TO NEW INFO, THE FOLLOWING HAS CHANGED:

My current take on Wikileaks and Assange (this has changed HUGELY) there’s really nothing in support of the current events being real

1.After going over the photos of Assange more closely, it looks like his base persona changed too much and that drugs or other “treatment” had to have caused it. So #1 is now a negative, and I believe they want photos of him out of the news cycle ASAP.

2. The media smear campaign may be accurate, Assange may have smeared poop on the walls after getting his brain erased, so #2 is now a negative.

3. The payoff of 4.3 billion to Ecuador is actually a negative, they probably received that for keeping their mouths shut about Assange.

4. Supposedly a total wiki dump was done But a close look at what was dumped now confirms there’s nothing new, it is all a PILE OF CRAP. #4 is now a huge red flag NEGATIVE.

5. Anonymous cyber attacked the HELL out of Ecuador. That did not change from a positive to a negative, however, Anonymous is like you and me, they are just people who can be fooled. So they’d attack.

Now the original – What hurts the legitimacy of the event:

1. The total “wiki dump” where everything was dumped appears to be a compliation of previous dumps, and contained far too many things I already have and have posted, even without Wikileaks. That’s a big problem. I predict ZERO items of relevance will be found that we don’t already know., but it looked good for politics, The entire dump is here. Granted, I did not go through it all, but I have seen tons of what is on that list before. This is not what I would expect from the legit Wikileaks. Maybe someone will find something but I have heard NADA and first glance was not one of good impression.

2. As I stated before, none of the original top people on the Wikileaks staff are still around, the three top players got killed off in 2016 and then there was the anomaly with Assange, where his “internet got cut” for an ENORMOUS time span, right in the middle of it all, and he never once afterward showed up on the balcony, which he had TOTAL access to, the embassy gave him that room so there’s no explanation for why he did not ever show up there.

3. Deep fakes are absolutely real, and what has happened with the Gettysburg Address proves faking Assange would be a cakewalk. Add to this the fact that someone live streamed Assange being removed the day before his internet got cut, purportedly for medical reasons after he got poisoned, and things look really sketchy.

4. All of the original police van arrest photos were taken by RT staff. How did they get a monopoly on this? For HOURS, RT was the only one with the story, until others started referencing RT. Why? Because if it was done by deep fake, there would only be one source. The source the most people trusted was chosen.

5. When I went to post about the problems with the Assange story, someone was actually audacious enough to highlight everything I typed in blue right in front of me, and delete it. When that happened, It was obvious someone did not want it stated and placed in a prominent location. I don’t know how they expected me to just suck it up and not re-write it all, but they at least tried. And that speaks volumes.

I am skeptical it was assange and not a deep fake, but am also skeptical of it being a deep fake rather than Assange. I really do not know what to think. If we don’t see actual video of Assange soon, that alone will speak volumes, why would there be none, even from the court?

Granted, the Gettysburg Address “Mandela” fakery compliments of the tech left is not helping things either. It has nothing to do with Wikileaks directly, but does clearly show that extremely convincing and downright audacious fakery can and will be done.

Perhaps the real issue with my doubting all of this originates from a proven scamming press that can’t be trusted to tell the truth with anything at all, and instead repeatedly produces fake after fake after fake. Given the background of what went on with Assange, a fair degree of skepticism is certainly in order. I am going to have to sit this one out and watch for screw ups.

My current take on Wikileaks and Assange

Pros (for ithe current events being legit:)1. Assange looked absolutely real, and exactly how I’d expect him to look if he was holed up out of sight for almost 3 years.

2. The media smear campaign boosted the credibility of this event a lot.3. The payoff of 4.3 billion to Ecuador.4. Supposedly a total wiki dump was done.5. Anonymous cyber attacked the HELL out of Ecuador.What hurts the legitimacy of the event:1. The total “wiki dump” where everything was 

dumped appears to be a compliation of previous dumps, and contained far too many things I already have and have posted, even without Wikileaks. That’s a big problem. I predict ZERO items of relevance will be found that we don’t already know., but it looked good for politics, The entire dump is here. Granted, I did not go through it all, but I have seen tons of what is on that list before. This is not what I would expect from the legit Wikileaks. Maybe someone will find something but I have heard NADA and first glance was not one of good impression.

DUE TO NEW INFO, THE FOLLOWING HAS CHANGED:My current take on Wikileaks and Assange (this has changed HUGELY) there’s really nothing in support of the current events being real1.After going over the photos of Assange more closely, it looks like his base persona changed too much and that drugs or other “treatment” had to have caused it. So #1 is now a negative, and I believe they want photos of him out of the news cycle ASAP.2. The media smear campaign may be accurate, Assange may have smeared poop on the walls after getting his brain erased, so #2 is now a negative.3. The payoff of 4.3 billion to Ecuador is actually a negative, they probably received that for keeping their mouths shut about Assange.4. Supposedly a total wiki dump was done But a close look at what was dumped now confirms there’s nothing new, it is all a PILE OF CRAP. #4 is now a huge red flag NEGATIVE.5. Anonymous cyber attacked the HELL out of Ecuador. That did not change from a positive to a negative, however, Anonymous is like you and me, they are just people who can be fooled. So they’d attack.Now the original – What hurts the legitimacy of the event:1. The total “wiki dump” where everything was dumped appears to be a compliation of previous dumps, and contained far too many things I already have and have posted, even without Wikileaks. That’s a big problem. I predict ZERO items of relevance will be found that we don’t already know., but it looked good for politics, The entire dump is here. Granted, I did not go through it all, but I have seen tons of what is on that list before. This is not what I would expect from the legit Wikileaks. Maybe someone will find something but I have heard NADA and first glance was not one of good impression.2. As I stated before, none of the original top people on the Wikileaks staff are still around, the three top players got killed off in 2016 and then there was the anomaly with Assange, where his “internet got cut” for an ENORMOUS time span, right in the middle of it all, and he never once afterward showed up on the balcony, which he had TOTAL access to, the embassy gave him that room so there’s no explanation for why he did not ever show up there.3. Deep fakes are absolutely real, and what has happened with the Gettysburg Address proves faking Assange would be a cakewalk. Add to this the fact that someone live streamed Assange being removed the day before his internet got cut, purportedly for medical reasons after he got poisoned, and things look really sketchy.4. All of the original police van arrest photos were taken by RT staff. How did they get a monopoly on this? For HOURS, RT was the only one with the story, until others started referencing RT. Why? Because if it was done by deep fake, there would only be one source. The source the most people trusted was chosen.5. When I went to post about the problems with the Assange story, someone was actually audacious enough to highlight everything I typed in blue right in front of me, and delete it. When that happened, It was obvious someone did not want it stated and placed in a prominent location. I don’t know how they expected me to just suck it up and not re-write it all, but they at least tried. And that speaks volumes.I am skeptical it was assange and not a deep fake, but am also skeptical of it being a deep fake rather than Assange. I really do not know what to think. If we don’t see actual video of Assange soon, that alone will speak volumes, why would there be none, even from the court?Granted, the Gettysburg Address “Mandela” fakery compliments of the tech left is not helping things either. It has nothing to do with Wikileaks directly, but does clearly show that extremely convincing and downright audacious fakery can and will be done.Perhaps the real issue with my doubting all of this originates from a proven scamming press that can’t be trusted to tell the truth with anything at all, and instead repeatedly produces fake after fake after fake. Given the background of what went on with Assange, a fair degree of skepticism is certainly in order. I am going to have to sit this one out and watch for screw ups.My current take on Wikileaks and AssangePros (for ithe current events being legit:)1. Assange looked absolutely real, and exactly how I’d expect him to look if he was holed up out of sight for almost 3 years.2. The media smear campaign boosted the credibility of this event a lot.3. The payoff of 4.3 billion to Ecuador.4. Supposedly a total wiki dump was done.5. Anonymous cyber attacked the HELL out of Ecuador.What hurts the legitimacy of the event:1. The total “wiki dump” where everything was dumped appears to be a compliation of previous dumps, and contained far too many things I already have and have posted, even without Wikileaks. That’s a big problem. I predict ZERO items of relevance will be found that we don’t already know., but it looked good for politics, The entire dump is here. Granted, I did not go through it all, but I have seen tons of what is on that list before. This is not what I would expect from the legit Wikileaks. Maybe someone will find something but I have heard NADA and first glance was not one of good impression.2. As I stated before, none of the original top people on the Wikileaks staff are still around, the three top players got killed off in 2016 and then there was the anomaly with Assange, where his “internet got cut” for an ENORMOUS time span, right in the middle of it all, and he never once afterward showed up on the balcony, which he had TOTAL access to, the embassy gave him that room so there’s no explanation for why he did not ever show up there.3. Deep fakes are absolutely real, and what has happened with the Gettysburg Address proves faking Assange would be a cakewalk. Add to this the fact that someone live streamed Assange being removed the day before his internet got cut, purportedly for medical reasons after he got poisoned, and things look really sketchy. 4. All of the original police van arrest photos were taken by RT staff. How did they get a monopoly on this? For HOURS, RT was the only one with the story, until others started referencing RT. Why? Because if it was done by deep fake, there would only be one source. The source the most people trusted was chosen. 5. When I went to post about the problems with the Assange story, someone was actually audacious enough to highlight everything I typed in blue right in front of me, and delete it. When that happened, It was obvious someone did not want it stated and placed in a prominent location. I don’t know how they expected me to just suck it up and not re-write it all, but they at least tried. And that speaks volumes. I am skeptical it was assange and not a deep fake, but am also skeptical of it being a deep fake rather than Assange. I really do not know what to think. If we don’t see actual video of Assange soon, that alone will speak volumes, why would there be none, even from the court? Granted, the Gettysburg Address “Mandela” fakery compliments of the tech left is not helping things either. It has nothing to do with Wikileaks directly, but does clearly show that extremely convincing and downright audacious fakery can and will be done. Perhaps the real issue with my doubting all of this originates from a proven scamming press that can’t be trusted to tell the truth with anything at all, and instead repeatedly produces fake after fake after fake. Given the background of what went on with Assange, a fair degree of skepticism is certainly in order. I am going to have to sit this one out and watch for screw ups.