Assange also met with Americans and got deliveries from Americans. Does that mean he's an asset for the CIA? There is equal evidence there. I don't understand how people make these giant leaps to conclusions one way but not another.
>Julian Assange received in-person deliveries, potentially of hacked materials related to the 2016 US election, during a series of suspicious meetings at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London
It could also be Chinese take-out. But CNN is going to speculate it's POTENTIALLY HACKED MATERIALS. Literally any delivery is potentially hacked materials. This is ridiculous.
Also, what makes meetings suspicious? There's no follow-up here, no substance. Why does CNN simply describe them as suspicious rather than provide evidence that suggests it might be?
Why is it a bombshell that he allegedly got hacked or leaked materials by courier? He clearly got them somehow, does it matter whether it was over email or in person? It's also possible it was a carrier pigeon - there's pigeons in the UK after all. And if he's getting materials from a courier, why does he need fancy hardware to get it digitally? This makes no sense.
There is absolutely nothing in this article other than speculation with a clear, logic-defying bias. And none of it is credible evidence Assange is working with the Russian government.