I would think Podesta would accept Mueller. Mueller apparently verifies the “Russia hacked DNC” view, even though having no reason to think it other than the DNC’s say-so.
Assange, of course, denies that the source was a “state actor”. Well, that still leaves open a provocateur agent for a “state actor”. But Mueller doesn’t go there. He just plain says Russia is the hacker; a “state actor”.
So it is established that a crime was committed (other than perjury and possible obstruction and/or coverup)?
Sure. that is what the indictments are based on. The DNC say-so.
Is it really necessary to dig up the old throes to jog your memory on the evidence?
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.