> 1. There's no guarantee that he acted alone and or without outside sponsorship. That has been debated and put to rest. Our elected officials initially tried

> 1. There's no guarantee that he acted alone and or without outside sponsorship. That has been debated and put to rest. Our elected officials initially tried to say he was a Russian spy, but could not provide any evidence to support the claim. If he were a foreign asset, like for the Russians, for example, he would not have acted the way he did. In fact, his handlers would have preferred that he continued to operate in secret and continue to feed them as much info as he can.