British Politician says Russia has NOTHING to do with the DNC Email Leaks!

Ambassador Craig Murray

From Constitution:

Former British Ambassador Craig Murray is an ally and friend of WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange and he visited Assange in the Ecuadorian Embassy on Wednesday to discuss his ongoing plight. What Murray learned could have a huge impact on the 2016 election, if the American people are allowed to hear it. 

There’s no proof that Russia did any of this. They’ve never admitted to it, and our intelligence community has never proven it. It’s simply a theory that the media and the Clinton team have implied is fact. 

Well, Ambassador Murray is here to dispel the rumors and to clear the air. Vladimir Putin and Russia had nothing to do with hacks on the Democrats, nor with the release of the hacked emails. 

Here’s what Ambassador Murray had to say from his personal website: 

I left Julian after midnight. He is fit, well, sharp and in good spirits. WikiLeaks never reveals or comments upon its sources, but as I published before a fortnight ago, I can tell you with 100% certainty that it is not any Russian state actor or proxy that gave the Democratic National Committee and Podesta material to WikiLeaks. 

The claim is nonsense. 

Journalists are also publishing that these were obtained by “hacking” with no evidence that this was the method used to obtain them. The control of the Democratic party machinery deliberately to unfairly ensure Clinton’s victory over Bernie Sanders is a matter of great public interest. 

The attempt by the establishment from Obama down to divert attention from this by a completely spurious claim against Russia, repeated without investigation by a servile media, is a disgrace. 

The over-close relationship between the probable future President and Wall Street is also very important. 

WikiLeaks has done a great public service by making this plain. The attempts by the mainstream media to portray WikiLeaks as supporters of Trump and Putin because they publish some of Clinton’s darker secrets is completely illogical and untrue in fact. 

The idea we must pretend Clinton is a saint is emetic. But the key point is that WikiLeaks is a publisher. It is a vehicle for publishing leaks, and is much more of a vehicle for whistleblowers than for hackers. It does not originate the material. 

I have often seen comments such as “Why has WikiLeaks not published material on Israel/Putin/Trump?” The answer is that they have not been given any. They publish good, verifiable material that they are given by whistleblowers. They are not protecting Israel, Putin, or Trump. Nobody has given them viable material. 

Did you get that? Russia did not get/give WikiLeaks any of the leaked emails/data. 

The media says the info was “hacked,” but WikiLeaks has never said that the information was gathered in that manner. Meaning, it could have been leaked by a whistleblower. 

The same people who “stole” the Democrat nomination from Bernie Sanders are now trying to shift attention from their corruption to Russia. 

Obama and the media are complicit in both the corruption and the cover up of the corruption. 

WikiLeaks doesn’t have a “dog in the fight;” they simply publish the information that is given to them by whistleblowers.