By Steve Cunningham, Special to the Advocate | As the American Thinker‘s Mike Razar has put it, regarding the DNC’s secrets being spilled in the last election, the question is, whether Wikileaks “received the information from the Russian government or from some non-Russian [source]” in the election? In other words, did Guccifer 2.0 directly leak information to Wikileaks?
In order to assess this, we need to look at all of the facts. An August 2017 cover article of the New Yorker magazine, entitled Julian Assange, a Man Without a Country, reveals some previously unknown, unreported or unpublished interactions of Guccifer 2.0 with others, including new information that does not even appear on the timeline of Guccifer 2.0 interactions on the “Guccifer 2.0: Game Over” website. One such interaction, as extracted from the aforementioned New Yorker article, relates to how Guccifer 2.0 apparently knew that Wikileaks is delayed in releasing the files that Guccifer 2.0 allegedly sent them, and that this knowledge shows that Guccifer 2.0 is supplying Wikileaks with information, or simply colluding with Wikileaks.
According to the New Yorker article, there are three such examples of interactions that reflect Guccifer 2.0’s insider knowledge, as described in the author Raffi Khatchadourian‘s own words (and arranged chronologically, with boldface added):
1) On June 17th, the editor of the Smoking Gun asked Guccifer 2.0 if Assange would publish the same material it was then doling out. “I gave WikiLeaks the greater part of the files, but saved some for myself,” it replied. “Don’t worry everything you receive is exclusive.” The claim at that time was true.
2) In early July, for example, Guccifer 2.0 told a Washington journalist that WikiLeaks was “playing for time.” (Indeed, the article by Joe Uchill from July 13 contains these sentences from electronic chats: “The press [is] gradually forget[ing] about me, [W]ikileaks is playing for time and [I] have some more docs.”)
3) According to Uchill’s July 22 article, The [Wikileaks] site does not specifically address who leaked the documents, but hacker Guccifer 2.0 who recently breached the DNC servers confirmed via electronic message that the emails came from that hack. “At last!” he wrote.
Khatchadourian notes other related interactions that have yet to be documented well, including Guccifer 2.0’s apparent attempt at interaction in mid-August 2016 with Emma Best, a journalist and a specialist in archival research who is suing the FBI for 2.1 million documents. Khatchadourian thinks that Guccifer 2.0 was considering sending his documents to Khatchadourian instead of Wikileaks in this time period. However, why would Guccifer 2.0 have written “at last!” on July 22nd to Uchill and seemed to be happy with Wikileaks’ progress in releasing documents, but then attempted to find a different entity or individual to release the documents only a few weeks later in mid-August? It would make more sense if, between June 17 and July 22nd, the dates of the first and third aforementioned interactions, Guccifer 2.0 would have expressed a desire to send the DNC documents elsewhere, then if he were to express this desire after Wikileaks’ interest in releasing documents was restored on July 22nd. Regardless, Emma Best later commented on Twitter regarding the article, stating that “This is accurate.”
The question for American Thinker readers, researchers and the G-2.space community ought to be, do you agree with the New Yorker article when it claims that Guccifer 2.0 knew that Wikileaks is delayed in releasing the files in July 2016, as per the New Yorker article, the editor of the Smoking Gun and the Uchill articles from July 13 and July 22nd? It would be helpful if full transcripts of interactions with Guccifer 2.0 would be released by these entities for publication and analysis.