The election will be finally over in under a week, and the heat has been turned up in a big way on Hillary Clinton — that could be the understatement of the year.
Fueled by a combination of factors — Wikileaks and Project Veritas, but more prominently the FBI reopening its investigation into her emails — the ultimate October/November surprise is occurring. In just a week, ABC News’ poll went from showing Hillary ahead by eleven points in a four-way race, to showing Trump ahead by a single point.
It’s going to be a nail-biter for sure, and it’s clear Hillary is getting desperate. The other day, she and her team spread a bogus story claiming Donald Trump himself has a private server he uses to communicate with Russia. You’d think Hillary would know better, considering everything she knows about private email servers. Regardless, the story fit into her narrative of Russia trying to rig the election (and that Trump is somehow responsible for it), so she ran with it.
Speaking of Russia, regardless of who hacked the Clinton campaign and leaked the information to Wikileaks, the truth is the truth, regardless of its origin — much as Team Clinton would try to deflect from it.
And we’re beginning to hear, the leak may not have been due to Russia at all. In fact, the Russians are claiming the leaks are from within Washington itself. At least, that’s the impression you’ll get if you read the Russian state-owned Sputnik, which reported that According to former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, the now infamous Podesta and Democratic National Committee emails were not leaked by Russian hackers, but by a Washington insider.In an exclusive interview with Sputnik, Mr. Murray said: “The source of these emails and leaks has nothing to do with Russia at all. I discovered what the source was when I attended the Sam Adam’s whistleblower award in Washington. The source of these emails comes from within official circles in Washington DC. You should look to Washington not to Moscow.” When asked about whether or not WikiLeaks have ever published information at the behest of Moscow, Mr. Murray said: “WikiLeaks has never published any material received from the Russian government or from any proxy of the Russian government. It’s simply a completely untrue claim designed to divert attention from the content of the material.”
It is fascinating to speculate who in Washington would be behind the hack — though we must take this story with a grain of salt, as it could just be the Russian government attempting to sway the narrative. Narrative has proven to be king in this election cycle more than ever.
Regardless, questions of who is truly behind the hack shouldn’t detract us from the ugly truth it’s revealing about the woman who wants to be president.
[Note: This post was written by The Analytical Economist]