This article is part of a two-part series. Read Part One covering Edward Snowden and the Pentagon-spawned internet privacy movement here.
Wikileaks and its odd frontman Julian Assange are part of the constellation of knowing and unknowing propagandists making up the Trump media complex, which miraculously succeeded in parlaying a deep state auxiliary into the White House by snookering the majority of the United States into believing he was a “political outsider” and “non-politician”. It has cloaked its relatively blatant political motivations and maneuvering in the robe of a dissident hactivist leak conduit and internet privacy advocacy group. As a kind of afterthought it endlessly advertises Tor (making it just as part of the phony internet privacy marketing infrastructure luring people into an NSA-FBI honeypot honeypot as Snowden & friends), but at this point its main calling is sentiment manipulation on behalf of Trump and his underwriters judging by the steady and unwavering drip of leaks damaging to Hillary Clinton. But before discussing Wikileaks, its bolstering of Trump and the myriad of indications that it’s an intelligence operation and/or proxy, it’s important to establish the mainstream media as part of the Trump media complex – keep in mind that Wikileaks and Wikileaks-seeded narratives have been frequently mentioned even in the mainstream media (and in particular Fox News).
“Russian interference” is the crux of Trump’s coverage in the media today. Although Donald Trump does have compelling connections to the post-Soviet ex KGB-Russian Jewish mob run underground government of Russia, there is clearly some kind of agenda behind the shrill drumbeat of accusations of collusion between “the Russians” and the Trump campaign/administration by the mainstream media (the foundational accusation being that Russia “hacked” the election). While most attribute this to a seething hatred of Trump by the entirety of the media and/or a witch hunt being conducted by the political establishment and deep state, CNN (the foremost Russia-monger) itself accidentally exposed that the story was largely a “bullshit” distraction but that it was pushed nonstop for ratings and viewership, both which are higher than ever.
This squares with Trump and his inner circle’s long-time cozy and well-hidden relationships with media executives and figures such as Jeff Zucker, Joe Scarborough/Mika Brzezinski, Rupert Murdoch, Roger Ailes, Lally Weymouth, Jeff Bezos, etc. whose number one priority since Trump announced his candidacy has been to cover him as much as humanly possible. At CNN, staffers complain of Jeff Zucker (Trump’s self-described friend and “personal booker“) and his insistence on constantly covering Trump. Zucker previously worked with Trump at MSNBC on The Apprentice and enjoyed a special relationship with him all throughout the election season which he used to turn CNN’s deteriorating ratings and viewership numbers around. Over at MSNBC, Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski (both of whom have communed with Trump at Mar-A-Lago) and their producers allow Donald Trump to personally dictate what they can and cannot ask him. Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump party at the Washington Post editor’s summer house in the Hamptons despite the fact that the mainstream press is allegedly out to publicly hang them. Trump has made a habit of publicly lambasting the Washington Post and its owner, Amazon’s Jeff Bezos. However, it looks as if Bezos in reality peddles influence in the Trump White House:
Then, at a tech gathering at Trump Tower during the transition in December, Bezos introduced himself as someone who is “super excited about the possibilities this could be the innovation administration” and appeared to have a positive outlook after his meeting. In a statement to Business Insider at the time, Bezos said his meeting was “very productive.”
This month, Bezos participated in Mr. Trump’s roundtable with the American Technology Council at the White House and applauded the administration’s work in technological innovation. He encouraged using commercial technology to save money and develop artificial intelligence to improve government services. 
Kingmaker and deep state abettor supreme Rupert Murdoch (who is a prominent advisor and backer of Trump’s) used his Fox News network to shamelessly boost Trump and the same right-wing authoritarian agenda it’s always endorsed (albeit with with a populist twist). Roger Ailes, former CEO of Fox News and a key architect of television as a medium for propaganda, launched Trump’s political commentary career by giving him a daily call-in segment on Fox & Friends and advised Trump all throughout the 2015-2016 campaign, all the while maintaining a sham Twitter feud with him.
As long as all the writers and producers (many of whom do probably despise Trump) focus virtually all of their attention on the president regardless of whatever petty mini-scandals they end up exposing, everyone is happy – Trump gets the exposure and attention he so craves without ever being totally destroyed, the Trump administration (which is in effect run by a colorful assortment of financial oligarchs, think tankers and defense industry NatSec boosters) has a red herring to distract from the agenda it’s working to push through and the media networks get higher ratings. And, obviously, given this deceptive agenda, you wouldn’t expect this ubiquitous Trump camp intrigue with the media to be a very big story in the media.
The media was indeed an integral part of Trump’s winning the election – the colossal, unprecedented amount of coverage (equivalent to $2 billion in free advertising) he received, regardless of whether it was positive or negative, in addition to the torrent of email leaks and scandals surrounding Hillary Clinton (many of which were seeded by Wikileaks) that were transmitted on full blast by both the alternative and ostensibly pro-Clinton mainstream media, propelled him into a position to win both the nomination and election. The ratio of negative coverage to positive Trump received was barely higher than that of any other Republican candidate’s and, contrary to what the shill altmedia says, probably lower than that of Hillary Clinton.   Many simply dismiss a conscious media role in boosting Trump through explaining the coverage as a response to higher polling numbers. Firstly, this fails to take into account that the mainstream media began heaping legendary amounts of coverage upon Trump before he ever registered in the polls or even announced his candidacy. Secondly, statistical studies have shown that, while increased media coverage has a strong statistically significant positive effect on public support for a given candidate, increased poll numbers only exert a small (but still statistically significant) effect on media coverage, meaning media coverage is the primary driver of public support. 
Coverage leads to increased public interest in a candidate, which leads to more coverage. Ultimately, this cycle results in higher poll numbers for candidates who leverage their entertainment value to reap the benefits of news coverage. Our findings demonstrate that a high volume of news coverage for candidates leads to increased support, supporting the old adage, “there’s no such thing as bad publicity.”
We do not find strong evidence to support the hypothesis that media coverage changes as a function of performance in polls. 
If Trump were truly a dire threat to the deep state and the media was entirely in the pocket of the Clinton crime family as the altmedia goons suggest, subtle orders filtered down through media executives and top editors (nearly all of whom play ball with the power-elite and have intelligence connections) would have made sure that Trump be utterly blacked out in the media and treated as a mere nuisance as opposed to a legitimate threat to democracy, guaranteeing that he be relegated to obscurity, as for example Ron Paul and Pat Buchanan were. Political outsiders are simply not given full control of the news cycle. The truth is that Donald Trump, contrary to both the alternative and mainstream media, is a long-time political insider who’s throughout his life had intimate ties to some of the most powerful men in the world and installed into the Oval Office by very same kinds of people his base loathes; he’s the latest in the line of phony political outsiders which includes Ross Perot, Ronald Reagan, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton, Ted Cruz, etc. and has been thrust into power by an alliance of the American conservative/defense establishment and the international Zionist syndicate under former CIA director and top neoconservative Zionist James Woolsey. These groups are vying for power within the administration as well as consorting and scheming with the liberal “globalist” establishment, which has managed to install numerous members in the administration.
Julian Assange and Edward Snowden are similar in that they are these supposed digital anti-establishment crusaders revealing the most damning of deep state secrets, yet they’re trotted out, paraded around and given all the publicity they could ever want by the fourth estate on a regular basis (as opposed to being suicided, almost entirely ignored or eternally imprisoned, as the vast majority of whistleblowers end up), indicating that they’re either controlled assets or simply unknowing dupes being used by the deep state or a deep state faction (read: the ultra nationalist right-wing national security and Israel boosters behind the Trump presidency) to advance some kind of agenda in return for free advertising and likely large sums of money.
Wikileaks, a purported political “transparency” advocacy group and email/document leak conduit, has, along with Russia been at the center of the hacking narrative since it began leaking emails and documents belonging to the DNC (which was allegedly hacked on the order of the Kremlin, which in return indirectly handed the hacked documents over to Wikileaks), DCCC, Hillary Clinton and Clinton’s campaign manager, John Podesta. The release of this material had a substantial impact on the course and outcome of the 2016 election largely thanks to the alternative (or, as I call “sidestream”) media and online disinformation outlet’s widespread circulation of the emails, which of course has been accompanied by their decidedly Clinton-hostile and incredibly loose interpretation of the typically ambiguous and out-of-context contents of said emails, even going so far as to construe (based on a largely fabricated code language) a far-reaching pedophile ring operating out of the non-existent basement of a high traffic pizza parlor. Given the sidestream/alternative media’s symbiotic relationship with the right-wing power structure and the fact that Wikileaks and its exotic, almost cartoonish silver-haired celebrity spokesman Julian Assange are regularly splayed all over mainstream television (even having been mentioned by presidential debate moderators), Wikileaks should be viewed with extreme suspicion.
Julian Assange displays many of the hallmarks of an intelligence asset:
- As a child, he was, for a not insignificant amount of time through a step father, exposed to (and later on the run from) Australia’s most notorious cult – “The Family”, a New Age doomsday cult based outside Melbourne that engaged in everything from attempted drug-induced mind control of its members to food deprivation to ritual sexual abuse. Additionally, members of The Family dyed their hair white, as Julian Assange does. The group miraculously evaded prosecution and eluded law enforcement for decades, which has led some to believe that it may have been protected by federal law enforcement and/or Western intelligence. There are several other indications of this: many members had multiple identities and passports, the cult was supplied free LSD (which at the time was being used all over the world in the CIA’s MKUltra mind control experiments) by the discoverer of the substance’s psychedelic effects, Sandoz Pharmaceuticals, and members of The Family at one point “nursed” Lord Casey, a prominent Australian diplomat and politician, at a Victoria psychiatric facility owned and staffed by Family cultists. Afterwards, Casey donated a large sum of money to the hospital.
- Assange was compromised by law enforcement in his 20s after having been caught hacking the now-defunct Canadian telecommunications equipment giant Nortel, after which it was then discovered that Assange (whose hacker handle was “Mendax”) had also been responsible for breaching the networks of Australian telecom Telstra, MILNET/the Pentagon as well as several major American corporations and more than a few American and Australian universities. Assange racked up a prodigious amount of felonies, yet served virtually no prison time. The reason given for this was that Assange supposedly had no malicious intent, but a more plausible explanation for the courts’ leniency would be because after being discovered, Assange was “turned” and gave “technical advise” to the Victoria Police Child Exploitation unit (in other words, helped the government catch online child pornographers), after which he began writing (sabotaging?) networking and encryption software and moderating computer security forums. Odds are after such a massive bust involving American government agencies (particularly the DoD), Assange was never truly let off the hook, yet remained a prominent internet privacy advocate. 
- It is extremely rare for someone accused of serious crimes in multiple countries (in the United States and Sweden on leaking/espionage and rape charges respectively) to be granted asylum by a legitimate government, in Assange’s case the Ecuadorian government. However, this isn’t the only apparent uncustomary treatment Assange has received. In 2010, while the British government was seeking to arrest Assange at the behest of INTERPOL, it seemingly allowed him to roam southeast England in plain sight for over a month despite the fact that law enforcement was aware of his whereabouts. The explanation given was incorrectly filed paperwork, but this hasn’t stopped governments with the United States breathing down their back from carrying out questionable arrests before and this conveniently gave Assange time to make arrangements for after he was arrested. Afterwards, while under house arrest awaiting bail in the UK, Assange stayed in a sprawling ten bedroom Georgian mansion supplied by Vaughan Smith, the founder of yet another dubious “independent media” organization, the Frontline Club, a highly secretive and exclusive “media club” stacked with war propagandists primarily from mainstream British media outlets. Several members of the Club were highly involved in pushing the Snowden psyop and in 2007, the Club interviewed Russian-Jewish oligarch Boris Berezovsky after he claimed to be orchestrating an apparently quite public coup against Vladimir Putin. However, there is much reason to believe that this was merely meant to further play into the anti-oligarch, anti-organized crime song and dance Putin pulls, because before Putin ascended to the Russian presidency, he met secretly with Berezovsky five times at his Spanish villa to discuss Putin’s replacing the ailing Boris Yeltsin.
- In 2011, famed Zionist lawyer Alan Dershowitz, part of Jeffrey Epstein, Les Wexner and Ghislaine and Robert Maxwell’s pedophilic blackmail ring, joined Assange’s legal defense team because of Wikileaks perceived promotion of “democracy” in the Middle East, which is merely a cloak for Israel’s agenda of fracturing and dominating the Middle East.
Not only does Assange raise more than a few alarms, Wikileaks as an organization behaves in a fashion unbefitting of a legitimate whistleblower organization that at the very best suggests that Wikileaks is a merely a cynical band of digital marketers being used by and latching on to political factions and at the very worst an outright intelligence front:
- Wikileaks (like Snowden and his partners in the media) release most of their information in tranches – it’s systematically doled out in a controlled fashion and release dates are opportunistically timed. This is highly suspicious behavior indicating publicity-seeking and/or cooperation with some other entity. The vast majority of whistleblowers and leakers dump all of their data at once immediately after they’re given the opportunity to release it. Most other leakers also don’t allow establishment journalists from outlets such as the New York Times (one of whom happened to be a member of the CFR and Aspen Institute) to heavily redact and edit their documents either. The content of Wikileaks material is suspect as well. Of all the Wikileaks diplomatic cable dumps, mention of Israel is curiously almost entirely absent, and instead, conveniently for Israel (even according to Benjamin Netanyahu, who says Israel “worked in advance” to prevent damage from leaks), trumped up Iranian nuclear threat propaganda is ubiquitous in its cable dumps. Perhaps this is the reason why right-wing Zionist kingmaker Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News is so friendly to Assange, on top of Assange’s friendliness towards Murdoch accessory Trump and his back-channeling with lavender mafia-linked GOP operative Roger Stone. The bottom line is that, clearly Wikileaks and/or whoever is providing Wikileaks with its content is selectively picking and choosing what to hand over. Wikileaks has even admitted to turning down publishing troves of documents related to Trump and Russia. So far, all emails/documents that have been analyzed have been verified as coming where they appear to come from and lacking any alternation via authentication of cryptographic signatures attached to all emails, but with Wikileak’s possible intelligence connections and background, it (or, more likely, whoever leaked the emails to them in the first place) could very well have knowledge of various proprietary cryptographic hash functions, meaning they could’ve effectively ‘forged’ authentication signatures across many email clients.
- Wikileaks is hypocritically opaque and obfuscatory about how it raises and handles funds. It taps less than 5 percent of funds received through PayPal and bank money transfers (not even bothering to pay for Chelsea Manning’s legal defense). And, according to a Wikileaks funds manager, it also likely receives sizable off-the-books donations from private sources. Even funds it procures from the public at large are collected and obscured in a complex roundabout method through the Wau Holland Foundation, a Hamburg-based nonprofit and freedom of information advocacy group. John Young of the genuine leak website Cryptome noted a pattern of behavior exhibited by Wikileaks that is similar to that of intelligence agencies and fronts. Other Wikileaks insiders have remarked on Cryptome that there is much internal strife within Wikileaks itself over Julian Assange’s mystifying and erratic behavior as well as his near total control over the group’s finances.
- Ever since its inception, Wikileaks has insisted that anyone who gifts leaks to them sign a nondisclosure agreement, making unpublished leaked material “solely the property of Wikileaks.” This means that Wikileaks has full control over anything they manage to get their hands on – they can destroy it, selectively publish material, release it in tranches (not typical of real whistleblowers), etc. and there’s nothing the originator of the leaks can do about it lest they be financially and legally ruined by Wikileaks. This is a massive indicator of a sham whistleblower operation.
- When Wikileaks was initially formed, it stated that it’s primary aim was to release leaked documents coming out of “China, Russia, and oppressive regimes in Eurasia, the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa”, all of which incidentally happen to be the foremost targets of US intelligence, leaving out maybe only Latin America. When it initially launched, Wikileaks itself claimed to have been “founded by Chinese dissidents, mathematicians and startup company technologists, from the US, Taiwan, Europe, Australia and South Africa.” Its advisory board “[included] representatives from expatriate Russian and Tibetan refugee communities, reporters, a former US intelligence analyst and cryptographers.” So far, Wikileaks has been predictably voracious in publicly undermining any country or organization that’s resisted Anglo-American global dominance, particularly Iran.
- Wikileaks’ recent ‘Vault 7’ CIA document dump laying out hundreds of putative CIA hacking tools appears to be nothing more than a classic limited hangout and probably partially fraudulent. Almost every single hacking technique, vulnerability and exploit “exposed” in the Vault 7 leak had been known to cybersecurity experts for years and some of the content within the documents appears to have been lifted straight off of Reddit, a disinformation hive which is itself one of the foremost proliferators and progenitors of a variety of comical Wikileaks-based conspiracy theories.
- Wikileaks, as discussed in the Snowden section of this article, is intimately connected to the national security state derived and funded internet privacy hactivist movement, anchored by Edward Snowden, Pierre Omidyar, Glenn Greenwald/The Intercept, the EFF, FPF, Tor, BGG, etc.
Of course, Wikileaks is only one half of the story. It leaks the documents and emails and the defense-connected Trump digital campaign propagates them and weaves a lunatic narrative around them. The two primary anchors of the right-wing populist digital campaign (as far as we know) are Robert Mercer/Cambridge Analytica and Peter Thiel/Palantir. Before being hired by the Trump campaign (likely through its owner, Robert Mercer’s relationship with media manipulator Steve Bannon), Cambridge Analytica was employed by the Ted Cruz campaign and the pro-Brexit campaign in the UK. Analytica’s London-based parent company, SCL Group, has been involved in orchestrating military disinformation campaigns and devising “psychological warfare” techniques for the British defense establishment. Analytica essentially infers traits about internet users through analyzing browsing history, location data, purchasing habits, etc. as well as unstructured data (such as full text) in order to tailor political messages to them in a discriminate fashion. Palantir, founded and owned by PayPal co-founder turned venture capital billionaire futurist and Facebook board member Peter Thiel, is a large analytics/data mining firm contracted almost exclusively by the intelligence community (the CIA in particular), law enforcement and large banks. It is basically one of the key analytics and information processing arms of the intelligence community – it’s software is used (using the intelligence community’s gargantuan dragnet and social media user data as inputs) to detect and predict target behavior.
Peter Thiel is one of Trump’s closest advisors and served on his transition team. Thiel has demonstrated that he has extensive knowledge of Trump’s analytics-driven digital media campaign, which isn’t surprising given the fact that “Thiel employees” (read: Palantir) have been seconded to work for the Trump campaign. Regardless of what the exact details are, it’s clear that Thiel was indispensably involved in the campaign in some way given the fact that he almost became the chairman of the President’s Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board (a position that’s been held previously be Brent Scowcroft and Chuck Hagel) before turning the position down. All political candidates now utilize analytics, but the Trump campaign very likely had an upper hand having scored two (and possibly more) intelligence-connected analytics firms, which naturally will have larger data sets to toy with.
Both Cambridge Analytica and Palantir specialize in data analytics/data mining (which is essentially teasing meaningful patterns out of data) and machine learning (which is computers “learning” to generate original predictive models) which, within the context of politics, apply to psychographics (classifying people for targeting), message tailoring, sentiment manipulation, etc. This digital media campaign (along with Hillary Clinton’s) certainly featured underhanded techniques such as click farming, creating fake social media accounts/bots (almost half of Trump’s Twitter followers are bots), permeating the internet, Facebook, Twitter, etc. with suspect articles and so forth. According to federal investigators currently looking into the use of bots in the 2016 presidential campaign, bot-engineered traffic to sites such as Breitbart (which is partially owned by Robert Mercer), Infowars, RT, SputnikNews, 4chan, Reddit, YourNewsWire, Voat, etc. was a significant driver of many of the pro-Trump and anti-Clinton viral stories surrounding the election (e.g. Pizzagate, Hillary’s health, George Soros voting machines, etc.) and that it may have been “one of the most highly impactful information operations in the history of intelligence.” Of course, this is all being chalked up to an exclusively “Russian” operation based out of St. Petersburg. While some operational headquarters may very well have been based out of Russia and it may be true that Russia was used as a proxy or staging area, the real story is with Cambridge Analytica and Peter Thiel, who are both in a position in the Trump inner circle and within the analytics/internet manipulation fields to serve as architects of this kind of sophisticated digital misinformation campaign. These kind of technologies paired with high-end analytics and data mining is probably the main reason that Trump garnered so much support online and how so many pro-Trump and anti-Clinton articles went viral. So what are some of the alt-right fever dream misinformation conspiracies that have gone viral as a result of Wikileaks likely in conjunction with Palantir/Analytica?
The most infamous is probably Pizzagate, the lurid theory originating from fake Twitter accounts and ludicrous anonymous 4chan posts that John Podesta in league with James Alefantis was running a child sex ring out of Alefantis’ Comet Ping Pong pizza restaurant. It is entirely predicated upon the Wikileaks-released leaked Podesta emails, which the proliferators of the theory fabricated a pedophile code language off of. Of course, the idea that any kind of child sex ring – especially one involving high-level political operatives and politicians – would ever be operated out of a heavily trafficked consumer-facing commercial location or orchestrated over Gmail using identifiable email addresses (whose passwords weren’t even changed until months after leaks began) is patently absurd on the face of it. But this of course didn’t stop legions of self-styled “independent investigators”, “pedophile watchdogs” and “internet sleuths” from running with the idea and continuing to elaborate and build out the bogus conspiracy by correlating generic logos for Comet Ping Pong and surrounding restaurants with pedophile symbols, attempting to construe pedophilia references from Instagram posts, falsely claiming that several outlandish paintings appearing to reference pedophilia were owned by John Podesta, etc., etc. Pizzagate as well virtually every other sensational conspiracy blathered on about by the Pizzagate ilk are cleverly implanted in people’s heads through the introduction of bizarre observations that wouldn’t have been made by anyone hadn’t the idea been suggested.
Roger Stone, an astoundingly underhanded (even for politics) GOP operative and long-time collaborator of Donald Trump’s introduced to him by prominent right-wing power structure installation and blackmail ring operator, Roy Cohn, likely featured heavily in the insertion of the Pizzagate narrative into public discourse. Stone has a colorful history of inventing stories and was, according to John Podesta himself, tipped off to the release of John Podesta’s emails by Julian Assange, or at the very lease had some kind of foreknowledge. Why would this purported non-political hactivist Assange slip information to one of the GOP’s most notorious tricksters? It certainly makes more sense within the framework of Wikileaks and Assange being effective intelligence operations.
For a highly detailed refutation of Pizzagate, see this article.
The Twitter post that initially sparked the Pizzagate theory referenced the FBI’s investigation into Anthony Weiner’s laptop as being part of a wider investigation into pedophilia. This is utterly false, but it’s worth pointing out that Anthony Weiner (and his wife Huma Abedin) could very well have been the target of an orchestrated right-wing hacking and/or entrapment campaign. The metadata in the “leaked” photos of him on Yfrog and Twitter indicate that his Twitter account was indeed hacked and his Facebook account had been hacked a week earlier. Additionally, the New York Post, part of Rupert Murdoch’s right-wing media empire, has been on top of many of the Weiner embarrassments from the beginning. It has inexplicably and mysteriously obtained many text and Twitter private message conversations between Weiner and one of his unidentified victims – the New York Post does not explain how it came into possession of the conversations, which is standard practice. There’s two possibilities – 1) the “mystery brunette”, who is supposedly a Trump supporter and NRA member, was a provocateur sent in to entrap and embarrass Weiner (however, she has never acknowledged leaking the conversations); or 2) the New York Post obtained the conversations through hackers. If this is the case, the illicitly obtained conversations likely came from within Rupert Murdoch’s vast electronic surveillance and hacking network which was exposed in the UK in 2010-2011 causing a massive scandal and extends to Murdoch’s media assets in the US as well.
Roger Stone and the Trump misinformation grid’s fingerprints are all over another Wikileaks story as well – the DNC leaks. Stone admitted to having talked privately with “Guccifer 2.0”, which is supposedly a composite identity for two Russian hackers, “Fancy Bear” and “Cozy Bear”, both of whom are, according to the intelligence community, responsible for hacking the DNC and Emmanuel Macron’s campaign (whose emails were also leaked by Wikileaks). The claim that “Russians” were responsible for hacking Macron is very likely false given the fact that the head of France’s cyber-security agency told the Associated Press that “no trace” of Russian meddling and that it could have been “practically anyone”. In reality, nobody on the outside knows exactly who is responsible for this recent wave of breaches. The government has presented virtually zero evidence that the Russian government was behind the hacks of either the DNC or Macron’s campaign. If this truly were the work of sophisticated hackers deployed or hired by Russia, the NSA, CIA and/or FBI could provide evidence and detailed analysis of the attack and exfiltration and how the stolen data was routed and be able to present it in such a way that it would not compromise their methods or sources.
Because the DNC refused to give the FBI access to their servers to investigate the incident, the only “evidence” we have for Russian involvement is the analysis of the attack by Crowdstrike, a cybersecurity firm whose chief technical officer is a senior fellow with the anti-Russia think tank, The Atlantic Council. Crowdstrike’s own evidence is weak and inconclusive – Cyrillic text files, known Russian or Ukrainian cryptographic keys, Russian IP addresses, etc. could very easily have been the result of actors using proxies, the result of outsourced hackers or intentionally left in the server logs by someone who knew what they were doing so as to make it appear that Russia or anyone else was behind the attack (something that intelligence agencies are known to do), while in reality the attack could possibly have been orchestrated/directed by one of the spook entities surrounding Donald Trump, such as the Mossad, neocon-Zionist CIA spook James Woolsey, Peter Thiel or Erik Prince of Blackwater infamy. Even if the hackers were Russian, this means very little and certainly does not translate into Russian state support or sanctioning of the attacks – many for-hire hackers are located Russia and throughout Eastern Europe. But the bottom line is that any hacker that knows what they’re doing knows how to cover their tracks, meaning the indications that the hack originated from Russia are there for a reason, perhaps to serve as a smokescreen for deeper covert domestic involvement in the election.
The right-wing misinformation network, in contrast to the mainstream media’s Russia obsession, thrust the notion that deceased DNC staffer Seth Rich was the source of the DNC leak and that he passed the leaked trove along to Wikileaks (there is no hard evidence to support this). While Rich’s death was suspicious, the dubiousness of the Wikileaks angle of the story almost begins to compete with Pizzagate. All of the characters in the story are seemingly involved in an incestuous self-reinforcing circle. Rich’s family was put in touch with private investigator Rod Wheeler (the main source of the assertion that Rich was the leak) through Dallas businessman Ed Butowsky, a (surprise surprise) Fox commentator and Breitbart columnist. Butowsky additionally funded Wheeler, who himself is a Fox News contributor. Rich’s family claims that Kim Dotcom, the self-proclaimed “internet entrepreneur” of Megaupload fame living essentially in exile in New Zealand, attempted to hack their son’s email account presumably to plant evidence suggesting Rich was Wikileaks’ DNC source. A supposed FBI file investigating the relationship between Rich and Wikileaks made the rounds in the alternative media, but was later found to be fake.
Snowden, Wikileaks, Assange, Trump – what do they all have in common? They’ve all been undeniably built up by both the controlled fourth estate/mainstream media and alternative media, which, contrary to what many of the phony digital marketers and publicity seekers in the altmedia would have you believe, is highly manipulated by behind the scenes characters like Robert Mercer and completely vulnerable to digital traffic-engineering campaigns which are, unbeknown to most, regularly coordinated by political campaigns, intelligence agencies/assets, digital marketing groups, corporations, PR firms, etc. Anyone with a sense of discernment would notice the contradiction between these kinds of characters’ purported political outsider renegade anti-establishment status and the fact that they’re perpetually broadcast in the media to the public. While it is true that a large part of the reason for this is the fact that the public loves a hero, but the question must be asked – why are these people and groups specifically so favored while others are shut out of public discourse entirely? My answer is that the ones who do somehow make it through the filter are always in some way sanctioned because all of them without exception have covert deep state ties which are always buried by the media itself.
 Trump tweet highlights complex relationship with Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos
 A deep dive into the news media’s role in the rise of Donald Trump
 Study: Hillary Clinton, not Donald Trump, gets the most negative media coverage
 Media Coverage, Public Interest, and Support in Primary Elections
 Deep state misappropriation and the cryptocratic clique behind Trump
 FTR #724 Wiki of the Damned
 Except from Unseen, Unheard, Unknown
 Julian Assange
 Assange helped our police catch child pornographers
 WIKILEAKS CASH FLOWS IN, DRIPS OUT
 Wikileaks CIA, Soros and Competitors Backlash
 WikiLeaks Threatens Its Own Leakers With $20 Million Penalty
 Cruz-Connected Data Miner Aims to Get Inside U.S. Voters’ Heads
 Feds Probe ‘Bot-Engineered’ Pro-Trump Fake News
 Podesta says Trump adviser Roger Stone may have had ‘advance knowledge’ of hack
 Was Anthony Weiner’s Twitter account hacked? The evidence for and against
 How Did The NY Post Get Anthony Weiner’s Texts And Pics?