Hey CHERFUL,
That was an awesome summary of the situation.
Only I wouldn't necessarily characterise Assange as a bad guy.

If Trump represents a 'conservative, nationalist, constitutionalist, We the People' position;
Then Hillary represents the 'progressive, globalist, anti-constitutionalist "We the Elites, Central Bankers, Multi-National Corporations, Deep State, New World Order' position.

In this light, Assange's original release of Manning documents in regards to NSA's unwarranted mass-surveillance on US citizens supports the 'conservative, nationalist, constitutionalist, We the People' Trump position.
Before Trump arrived on the political scene many in the conservative right wondered of Assange, "Is he a good guy or a bad guy?"
But since then one can't deny that he's done a lot of good for the 'We the People / Trump' position.
He released of Podesta emails supporting the 'We the People / Trump' position, which greatly damaged the Clinton campaign, and just recently when Trump accused Obama of wiretapping, Assange acted in a manner that was defensive or supportive of Trumps statements by releasing the CIA documents outlining their capabilities.
Their may have been prior inside knowledge of Wikileaks CIA release which Trump may have deliberately used to bait the media by tweeting regarding 'Obama's wiretapping' thus creating ObamaGate; similar to Richard Nixons 'Watergate'.
Assange promised to hand himself in if Manning was granted clemency, which Obama did, but then in January he renegged.
What if Trump himself told Assange not to hand himself in and that he could do more good remaining in the embassy for the time being?
I'm not saying that's what happened, but who knows?

Hi AC,

So Trump, Putin and Assange are all now besties ?

If Assange turned up at the US embassy, after having done his time in Sweden for rape, and if Trump is still President, maybe Assange could get given a Medal of Honour from Trump ?

Who would have predicted that a few months ago, when Obama was hounding Assange and demanding that the Swedes immediately hand him over, just after the British had handed him over to the Swedes ?

'The past is unknown, the present is indeterminate, only the future is certain' say Utopians. Really ?

Cheers,

Joe

Hey Loudmouth,
"...is it possible that Clinton and Trump are opposite sides of the same coin?"

We'll as outlined in the previous comment, domestically they seem to hold differing viewpoints.
What really interests me is Trumps foreign policy positions.
It's there your question becomes really relevant.

"Internationally, Obama followed and/or engineered what was probably the most sensible paths in incredibly difficult situations, Syria, Afghanistan and eastern Europe."

Syria: Arming and Supporting Jihadists in a proxy war against Assad?
Afghanistan: The war has been great for Opium production, and I'm sure Oil and Gas pipelines from the Caspian to India are high on their agenda too.
Eastern Europe: Victoria Nuland's $5Bln coup of Ukraine?

Its not about Trump and Putin being 'mates'.
It's about these very issues you are citing and the Deep State's agenda that's the real reason why Trump being 'mates' with Putin is so deeply opposed and undermined.
Check this news article:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ambassador-cause-of-death-wont-be-released/
Seems obvious it wasn't natural causes, so are the Obama-loyal intelligence agencies trying to prevent Trump and Putin working together?
Trying to cause a stink between them like Obama tried to do ordering all ambassadors back to Russia last last year?

Hi AC,

I think you are mixing your conspiracies there :)

No, I didn't suggest that the policies of Clinton and Grump were the same, or even similar (although some of Sanders' and Trump's might be, come to think of it), but that they were the reactive opposites of each other.

I'm a simple person: I don't believe too many conspiracy theories (maybe because I can't really understand them, they're just too complicated). They are usually unprovable one way or the other, so they're not worth wasting brain-work over. So I'll stick to 'what you see is what where is.' God, I'm so naïve.

Cheers,

Joe

A key part of this thread that's bothered me is the way it's phrased repeatedly as though Trump is setting new rules on truth.

Trump is following in a long tradition.

The late Christopher Hitchens is worth a watch on the Clintons. This one is mostly about Bill https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbegbXEj9eM on his book "No One Left To Lie To"

Very few are left I think who would doubt that the invasion of Iraq was based on lies regarding evidence of weapons of mass destruction. A lie of the Bush administration that has cost at least hundreds of thousands of lives but possibly millions, trillions of dollars and enormous turmoil.

From what I understand Obama lied about the mass surveillance that was exposed by Edward Snowdon. I'm not sure how much else has been conclusively proven to be lies. I'd put the comments by him about the suppression of right leaning and libertarian groups by the IRS as lies.

R0bert

Loudmouth - Follow the link your whole argument has been blown out.

Basically there will be no document saying wire tap Trump, because everything is being recorded and has been for years.

http://www.corbettreport.com/?s=paultruth

Only 9.48 minutes

http://www.corbettreport.com/interview-685-russ-tice-reveals-the-truth-about-nsa-spying/