RUSH: So Julian Assange has been arrested in the Ecuadoran embassy in the U.K. The Drive-By Media is ecstatic. And for those of you that are not clear on why, the Drive-By Media is again manufacturing a wholesale lie. And the lie is that WikiLeaks was the recipient of data from the computers and networks, the Democrat National Committee, that were hacked by Russians.
This is a myth. This is a story. The Russians hacked the DNC computers and then gave whatever they got to Julian Assange and WikiLeaks, who then began to publish it in September and October of 2016. The stuff that WikiLeaks published were the emails of John Podesta, and they were interesting, and in some cases, embarrassing, and they were certainly unhelpful to the Hillary campaign.
The truth is that whether or not the Russians hacked the DNC computers, the Podesta emails were not part of it. The Podesta emails ended up in the public because Podesta fell for a phishing scam on his own computer. We all get them. He made the mistake of clicking on a link that exposed his computer and his hard drive to whoever it was that had sent him the phishing attack. And they then had access to his hard drive, and they found the application in which he ran his emails, and they were able to harvest them, and that’s what was sent to WikiLeaks.
Julian Assange has denied vociferously, profusely, omnivorously and voluminously that the Russians didn’t give him anything, that the Russians were not the people that gave him anything that he had.
There’s an alternate theory about who hacked the DNC servers or networks or computers. And that alternate theory is that it was an inside job. There’s actually three theories. The Russian theory; theory number two is an inside job, that somebody within the DNC was very unhappy that the whole thing was rigged against Crazy Bernie.
See, this is what this upcoming investigation is going to show. It was the DNC that rigged an election, and that election was their primary, and they rigged it in favor of Hillary Clinton. She was as lousy a campaigner during the Democrat primaries as she was during the general election. Crazy Bernie was drawing all the crowds, and he was winning a significant number of delegates.
But they had the game rigged for Hillary. She was assured to get, via the allocation of what are called superdelegates, the nomination. And Crazy Bernie ended up knowing it, but because you don’t pee inside the tent, he swallowed it and went away to come back and fight another day, which is today, for his chance at 2020.
So the second theory is that an insider in the DNC who was very much pro-Bernie and very livid at how this whole thing had been rigged, didn’t hack anything, just went in and downloaded a bunch of data on a thumb drive and fed that to Julian Assange or whoever.
Now, there is a lot of technological support for that theory. And let me explain it to you in terms that everybody who uses a computer can understand. All of you who use a computer know that it takes a long time to download things unless you have a real high-speed network. If you have gigabit Ethernet and you have the ability to download at 500 megabits a second or even up close to it, then you can download things pretty quickly. But most people don’t have this.
Most people have a hundred, 150, whatever their cable modem company supplies. You also know that if you attach a thumb drive to your computer and transfer data from your hard drive to a thumb drive, that happens pretty quickly. That transfer rate is really fast, and it doesn’t happen on the internet.
Well, it turns out, folks, that a forensic analysis of the data that was at one time on the Democrat National Committee servers, the transfer speeds were logged. And there’s no way that the data could have been transferred over the internet at the speeds that it was shown on the logs. This is why this theory is very active.
The prevailing opinion that nobody wants to talk about and nobody’s gonna make a big deal of because nobody wants to focus on an inside job happening, but it looks like somebody put a thumb drive into one of the computers attached to the network and started downloading data because the data transfer was lickety-split, much faster than it could have happened even other gigabit Ethernet.
For somebody to get the volume of data via an internet hack would have taken a long time even if they had gigabit Ethernet speeds. The speeds vary depending on internet traffic and how much traffic is on the source where you’re trying to download data from and how many users are — it’s all relative. It’s never the same two downloads in a row. Download speeds are really crazy. But the speed with which this data was transferred was lickety-split.
My best guess is that this was actually an inside job that nobody wants to talk about. There was a name at one time attached the inside job. His name is Seth Rich. He is the guy who ended up being murdered shortly after all this happened and some people tried to make the case that his murder was payback for having engaged in this sabotage.
It was quickly dispensed with as another conspiracy theory fomented by a bunch of radical creeps that don’t know what they’re talking about.
So the popular working explanation is that the Russians hacked the DNC server and gave it to Assange. The third is that a foreign actor looking like the Russians — you can disguise yourself as a hacker, and you can make it look like you’re a Russian hacker, ChiCom hacker, North Korean hacker. This would be one of the Guccifers made to look like a Russian hacker. But the Podesta emails, which is what Assange had and publicized, did not come from any hack of any DNC computer or server or network.
The Podesta emails ended up on WikiLeaks because John Podesta himself fell for a phishing attack. This has been documented. It is not arguable. Podesta will not admit it. The media will not talk about it because it’s just too juicy to say that Assange got this stuff from the Russians.
So when they used to love Assange, is what I want to focus on, because now they hate Assange because Assange supposedly participated in the sabotage of the DNC server. But he didn’t. He didn’t. Whoever ran the phishing scam on Podesta is who it was that gave WikiLeaks Podesta’s emails.
But let’s go back December 14th, 2010, just as an example. We could have found a bunch of these. Countdown With Keith Olbermann. What better example to show hyper-liberalism. Michael Moore was the guest, filmmaker Michael Moore. And Keith Olbermann said, “You offered the use of your website before Assange or your servers or anything else you can do to keep WikiLeaks alive. You want to keep WikiLeaks alive –” this is December 2010. “What’s the premise of keeping WikiLeaks alive?”
MOORE: We really owe a — a debt to Mr. Assange and to WikiLeaks for turning on a big spotlight on those people who brought about, first of all, uh, this war that we’ve been in, uh, for the better part of this decade. These people concocted lies, and they committed crimes, in order to send our young men and women off to war. What if we had a WikiLeaks in August of 1964 when we were told that the North Vietnamese fired on a U.S. ship — which, in fact, was a lie? It was a concocted lie at the Pentagon, and we didn’t find out about that until Daniel Ellsberg released the Pentagon Papers some six, seven years later. What if there had been a WikiLeaks?
RUSH: Nine years ago, babe. Nine years ago, they were lovin’ themselves some WikiLeaks! WikiLeaks was gonna save the left from the military-industrial complex of the Republican Party and George W. Bush. Michael Moore continued with his praise and admiration for WikiLeaks…
MOORE: Imagine the Dick Cheney memos back and forth as he was pressuring the CIA at the beginning, uh, just before this last Iraq war started. What if those memos had been released in 2002 or 2003 so the American people could see he was trying to get the CIA to gin up the evidence and sort of fudge the facts so they could make their case, uh, for war? (sputtering) I just think an instrument like WikiLeaks is vital for a free and open society to exist.
RUSH: Except now WikiLeaks ran the Podesta emails. That’s the last thing — well, not the last thing WikiLeaks did. But one of the problems is that WikiLeaks has actually been committing journalism. Compared to our Drive-By Media, WikiLeaks has been committing journalism, a random act of journalism now and then — and publishing the Podesta emails? “No, no, no, no. We can’t have WikiLeaks used to expose Democrats! No, no, no, no. We can’t. We cannot do that.”