From: Bill Vanek <>
Subject: Re: Julian Assange on The Memo
Full headers:
From: Bill Vanek <>
Subject: Re: Julian Assange on The Memo
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2018 22:00:26 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <>
References: <> <> <h5vdC.14275$KA7.9169@fx05.iad> <> <p561jb$agm$> <> <EYwdC.2068$9W2.709@fx31.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Info:; posting-host="3754041d651c6e122442d8f4d21e98f5";
logging-data="20623"; mail-complaints-to="";posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+GveZE7p0E7d0cCHXkT+hKYvwVidgdvs0="
User-Agent: ForteAgent/
Cancel-Lock: sha1:i9SI6kVGOzyxTrTqFYBINDmZMmo=
Print Article
Forward Article
On Sat, 3 Feb 2018 21:35:32 -0800, Dutch<> wrote:

>On 2/3/2018 8:26 PM, Bill Vanek wrote:
>> On Sun, 4 Feb 2018 04:18:51 +0000 (UTC), (Bradley K.
>> Sherman) wrote:
>>> Bill Vanek<> wrote:
>>>> ...
>>>> What is it when the FBI & Fusion fight or ignore subpoenas? What's
>>>> your name for that? By your reasoning, they must be very guilty of
>>>> very bad things.
>>> My name for it is bullshit.
>> Funny, that's my name for the Trump investigation. Strange how that
>> works.
>And like the congress and Trump, you can't PROVE it's bullshit, you just 
>repeat it over and over and over...

Prove anything. Seriously. I will be honest, I don't do my own
research, I don't do my own detective work. I read, that's all. I'm
going to assume that it's the same for you, except you don't read, you
just watch. I have many varied sources, you have one. Your opinions
are not at all surprising considering that. You don't weigh the
plausibility of varied sources because you don't have varied sources.
That's pretty limiting, and shows a lack of intellectual curiosity.
After a lifetime of that, you just end up stupid.