For more than a year now Robert Muellers Special Council has been investigating alleged ties between Trump, his team, and the Russian government. More recently, the Democratic party has brought forward a lawsuit against Trumps team, Russia, and Wikileaks. Part of the charge made by the democrats in the lawsuit is that Russia hacked the DNC servers and passed the documents on to Wikileaks to help Trump winning the 2016 election.
Although this is the basis of the DNCs argument, the only evidence they've provided to back up their claim comes from the Clinton aligned private cyber-security firm, Crowdstrike. There's even less evidence to suggest that Russia passed said documents on to Wikileaks. Since that report was published in late 2016 Wikileaks has unfairly been called everything from a Russian cut-out and Putin Puppet, to a hostile non-state intelligence agency, and even a terrorist group.
The Clinton camp are pinning all their hopes on this one report from Crowdstrike. But what if that one report could be debunked?
The very nature of their setup makes Wikileaks a far more technical media organization than most. For over a decade they have been using digital forensics to verify documents and data. Given their technical expertise it would be safe to assume that Wikileaks would have logs of everyone that has leaked to their organization over the years. If the DNC emails did in fact come from Seth Rich, like many of us believe they did, then it should stand to reason that Wikileaks would also have logged evidence of this, just as Kim Dotcom and Assange himself have more than eluded to over the past 18 months.
If this is the case then you may be wondering why Wikileaks has yet to provide this evidence to the Mueller investigation. Well, I see a couple of reasons for this. First, Mueller hasn't requested any information from Wikileaks relating to the leaks. Secondly, it would go against Wikileaks strict ethical rule of never revealing a source.
My theory is that Wikileaks is patiently waiting until the Mueller investigation is over and the final verdict has been made public before deciding whether or not to say anything. If Muellers investigation comes back and clears Russia and Wikileaks from any involvement in the 2016 presidential election then Wikileaks won't need to prove itself, and they'll be able to maintain their 100% record of keeping their sources secret.
Only if the Mueller investigation is corrupt enough to come back with a guilty verdict will Wikileaks need to come out with proof Seth rich was the source of the leaks. Revealing the source of the DNC documents is essentially a last resort for Wikileaks.
