4 ms·
> For those making quips about Russia: Assange has already claimed the source was _not_ Russia. Assuming Assange is telling the truth, how would he even know
by ardy42 6y ago
> For those making quips about Russia: Assange has already claimed the source was _not_ Russia.
Assuming Assange is telling the truth, how would he even know who the ultimate source was?
I mean, Russia might be sophisticated enough to not pass on information like this using someone with an obvious connection to them. It's not like their agents are required to have an accent out of a Bond movie and wear a KGB/FSB uniform all the time.
- V6HBGNQHU 6y agoMaybe because he know the source's name rhymed with breath itch.
- llbowers 6y agoPlease, for the good of this site and the wishes of his own family, don't post baseless conspiracy theories like that. Edit - as the original post I was responding to has been removed I have edited out my response to it delving into more information.
- mhh__ 6y agoUnless they wanted it known, that is most likely the case. The non/-statements by Assange around Seth Rich are worth considering too, the Mueller report apparently establishes a chronology whereby he would've known these documents weren't coming from a single person. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Seth_Rich#WikiLeaks_statements https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Seth_Rich#WikiLeaks_...
- endtime 6y ago> Assuming Assange is telling the truth, how would he even know who the ultimate source was? If he received the emails from someone with direct access to them - e.g. someone who worked for the DNC - Occam's Razor would suggest a lack of Russian involvement. (Not saying this is the case, just pointing out one possibility.)
- dencodev 6y agoIt's the most obvious possibility.