+4

Wikileaks Operative Tells Radically Different Story of How It Got DNC Emails: "Inside Leaks, Not Hacks" Former British ambassador Craig Murray has come forward in the foreign press to assert the DNC emails released by Wikileaks were not obtained by hacks, but rather came via leaks within the Democratic National Committee. Murray has a checkered past, according to his detractors, as a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan who came under fire for alleged unethical practices. After an investigation, Murray was cleared of charges of misconduct; but he left the service in 2004 and later joined forces with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. The Wikleaks operative told his version of the story how DNC and Clinton Foundation emails were obtained by Wikileaks to The Daily Mail. “Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,” Murray said in an interview. “The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.”

The Daily Mail explains the motivation of a purported source within the Democratic Party for turning over emails:

A Wikileaks envoy today claims he personally received Clinton campaign emails in Washington D.C. after they were leaked by 'disgusted' whisteblowers - and not hacked by Russia. [...]

He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.'

U.S. intelligence agencies and private firm Crowdstrike, contracted by the DNC itself to investigate, have a high degree of certainty that the DNC was hacked from the outside. A partial list of the evidence leading investigators to believe the emails were obtained by hackers, via The Intercept:

Phishing: Domain similar to the target's domain used in order to obtain transmissions from DNC employees associated with IP of Russian-affiliated hacking network Apt 28/Fancy Bear

Malware: The same IP is believed to have placed malware on the DNC's computers to communicate with Apt 28/Fancy Bear

DCLeaks.com was registered by person using same email service as hackers involved in phishing expedition

Such evidence conflicts greatly with Murray's account of how Wikileaks obtained the DNC emails. Nonetheless, he alleges that he met a contact near American University, which is located near Washington D.C.

Wikileaks Operative Tells Radically Different Story of How It Got DNC Emails: "Inside Leaks, Not Hacks"..."the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton"...http://ijr.com/wildfire/2016/12/756739-wikileaks-operative-tells-radically-different-story-of-how-it-got-dnc-emails-inside-leaks-not-hacks/?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=afternoon-newsletter&utm_medium=ownedImage for post Wikileaks Operative Tells Radically Different Story of How It Got DNC Emails: "Inside Leaks, Not Hacks" Former British ambassador Craig Murray has come forward in the foreign press to assert the DNC emails released by Wikileaks were not obtained by hacks, but rather came via leaks within the Democratic National Committee.  Murray has a checkered past, according to his detractors, as a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan who came under fire for alleged unethical practices. After an investigation, Murray was cleared of charges of misconduct; but he left the service in 2004 and later joined forces with Wikileaks founder Julian Assange. The Wikleaks operative told his version of the story how DNC and Clinton Foundation emails were obtained by Wikileaks to The Daily Mail.  “Neither of [the leaks] came from the Russians,” Murray said in an interview. “The source had legal access to the information. The documents came from inside leaks, not hacks.”
75%Agree25%Disagree
YoAdriennes avatar People & Celebrities
Share
1 7

Oh YoAdrienne, you know this is not true. The hacks were done by the Russians, who are also interfering in other countries elections. Whether it was done to undermine our system, or to tilt it towards Trump, remains to be seen. But since it only seemed to effect one party, I would say the latter is probably going to end up being true as well.

@dru18 Oh YoAdrienne, you know this is not true. The hacks were done by the Russians, who are also interfering in other...

Only effected one party .... Hmm, that tends to support Adrienne's proposition - doncha think?

I have more confidence in the CIA than anything Wikileaks has to say.

Another name on the list of Clinton associates found dead...Who would be surprised.! Wikileaks envoy today claims he personally received Clinton campaign emails in Washington D.C. after they were leaked by 'disgusted' whisteblowers - and not hacked by Russia. <...>

He said the leakers were motivated by 'disgust at the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Bernie Sanders.'Image in content

He said, she said.

It is coming out that the WH knew about Russian leaks but didn't do anything about them because they thought Clinton would win the election. That finger pointing at Trump has three more pointing back at them.

This whole scenario seems to make a lot more sense than the Russian thing. I mean, leaking that stuff offered no guarantee of success, only damaged a few people [well, and the whole democrat party]. THAT sounds like a worthy motive to me! And, the democrats pushing the Russia scenario to divert any attention away from Murray is so typical democrat.

This totally makes sense!

Anonymous