I’m not buying this.
The Wikileaks source was Seth Rich, a whistleblower within the DNC who was angry over the DNC’s torpedoing of Betnie Sanders and the “anointing” of HRC.
A whistleblower with a passionate motive makes an extremely credible witness and the DNC had every incentive to discredit damaging information coming from Wikileaks.
What better way to discredit Wikileaks than to claim that the source was Russian propaganda?
The MSM was happy to sell the DNC cover story as long as it would hurt Trump who they hate with every fiber of their beings.
This article may offer a new twist - that the Russian propaganda was intended to hurt Trump, not HRC, or perhaps to hurt whoever became president. However, it still reinforces the DNC cover story that it was the Russians, not Seth Rich who was the Wikileaks source.
Don’t buy it folks. They are trying to throw us off the scent.
The source was Seth Rich.
Assange all but said so in his interview with Hannity when he said “Russia is not the source. The source was not a state player.”
Then he say “Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material, often very significant risks. There’s a 27-year-old that works for the DNC who was shot in the back, murdered, just two weeks ago, for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington. So…”
Don’t buy this - it’s another trick to throw us off the scent.
Very good points.