【新】【萨拉博士】《阿桑奇希望通过维基解密证实民主党全国委员会电子邮件的来源是塞斯里奇，而不是俄罗斯人》－如是說999

Assange Expected to confirm Wikileaks source of DNC Emails was Seth Rich not Russians

Written by Dr Michael Salla on April 25, 2019.Posted in Featured, US Politics

2019-04-27

The April 11 arrest of Julian Assange has resurrected the narrative that emails stored on the Democratic National Committee(DNC)were not hacked by Russia,but leaked by a disenchanted employee,Seth Rich,who wanted to expose how Bernie Sanders was systematically undermined during the 2016 primaries by the DNC.According to this narrative,Rich communicated with Assange and handed over the DNC emails through Wikileaks'secure online drop box.

4 月 11 日朱利安•阿桑奇 (Julian Assange) 被捕，重新引发了一种说法，即存储在民主党全国委员会 (DNC) 的电子邮件不是俄罗斯黑客入侵的，而是被一名不再抱有幻想的雇员塞斯•里奇 (Seth Rich) 泄露的。里奇想要揭露伯尼•桑德斯 (Bernie Sanders) 在 2016 年民主党全国委员会初选期间是如何被系统地破坏的。根据这种说法，里奇与阿桑奇进行了沟通，并通过维基解密的安全在线投递箱移交了 DNC 的电子邮件。

Assange first stated in a June 12,2016,interview that Wikileaks had more of the missing emails from Hillary Clinton's private email server during her time as Secretary of State:"We have upcoming leaks in relation to Hillary Clinton…We have emails pending publication,that is correct."

阿桑奇在 2016 年 6 月 12 日的一次采访中首次表示，维基解密有更多希拉里·克林顿担任国务卿期间私人电子邮件服务器丢失的邮件 :" 我们即将有关于希拉里·克林顿的泄密事件 ...... 我们有即将发表的邮件，这是正确的。 "

Two days later,the computer security company"Crowdstrike"published a report that the DNC email servers had been hacked by Russia.The mainstream media quickly embraced the Russia hacking narrative to explain why Clinton and DNC emails were in the hands of Wikileaks.

两天后，计算机安全公司 "Crowdstrike" 发布了一份报告，称 DNC 电子邮件服务器被俄罗斯黑客攻击。主流媒体迅速接受了俄罗斯黑客的说法，解释为什么克林顿和民主党全国委员会的电子邮件被维基解密掌握。

Here's what the Washington Post’s Ellen Nakashima had to say on June 14,2016:

以下是《华盛顿邮报》的 Ellen Nakashima 在 2016 年 6 月 14 日的报道 :

Russian government hackers penetrated the computer network of the Democratic National Committee and gained access to the entire database of opposition research on GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump,according to committee officials and security experts who responded to the breach.

据委员会官员和安全专家称，俄罗斯政府黑客侵入了民主党全国委员会的计算机网络，并获得了对共和党总统候选人唐纳德·特朗普的反对派研究的整个数据库。

However,multiple sources pointed out major problems with Crowdstrike as a competent and impartial investigator into the alleged Russian hacking:

然而，多个消息来源指出 Crowdstrike 作为一个称职和公正的调查员对所谓的俄罗斯黑客行为的主要问题 :

The Nakamura[Nakashima]piece marked the first salvo in the Russian hacking meme.But the claim was not backed up by independently verified forensic evidence—it rested solely on the conclusions of a computer security company—Crowdstrike.The pro-Ukrainian politics of Crowdstrike's founder,Dmitri Alperovitch,and his strident opposition to Russia cast a pall of bias over the findings of Crowdstrike.No U.S.Federal Law Enforcement official or agency was given access to the DNC servers.Neither the FBI nor Homeland Security were permitted to examine the servers and the alleged evidence of a hack.

中村 (Nakamura ，中岛 ) 的文章标志着俄罗斯黑客模因的第一轮攻击。但这一说法并没有得到独立核实的法医证据的支持——它完全依赖于一家计算机安全公司 crowdstrike 的结论。 Crowdstrike 创始人德米特里•阿尔佩罗维奇 (Dmitri Alperovitch) 的亲乌政治立场，以及他对俄罗斯的强烈反对，给 Crowdstrike 的调查结果蒙上了一层偏见的阴影。没有美国联邦执法官员或机构获得进入 DNC 服务器的权限。联邦调查局和国土安全部都没有被允许检查服务器和所谓的黑客证据。

In his 2019 best-selling book,Spygate:The Attempted Sabotage of Donald J.Trump,, Dan Bongino,a former Secret Service officer,detailed the multiple flaws in the Crowdstrike investigation and the puzzling decision to deny the FBI access to the allegedly hacked DNC email server.

前特勤局 (Secret Service) 官员丹·邦吉诺 (Dan Bongino) 在他 2019 年的畅销书《间谍门 : 对唐纳德· j· 特朗普 (Donald j.Trump) 的蓄意破坏》 (Spygate:The attempt Sabotage of Donald j.Trump) 中，详细描述了 Crowdstrike 案调查中的多个缺陷，以及令人费解的决定，即拒绝联邦调查局。

Almost a month after Assange's interview that Wikileaks had more Clinton emails and was vetting them for eventual release,Rich was murdered on July 10,2016,in very strange circumstances.Nearly two weeks later,on July 22,Wikileaks dumped 20,000 DNC emails on its website.

在阿桑奇接受维基解密采访，得知克林顿的电子邮件越来越多，并准备最终公布之后，将近一个月后，里奇于 2016 年 7 月 10 日在一个非常奇怪的情况下被谋杀。将近两周后，也就是 7 月 22 日，维基解密在其网站上公布了 20000 封民主党全国委员会的电子邮件。

A July 25,2016,story published in Vox by Timothy Lee covered the Wikileaks DNC dump and found that many showed the DNC favored the Clinton campaign over Bernie Sanders.In November 2017,Donna Brazile,the former chair of the DNC,confirmed that the DNC had systematically supported Clinton over Sanders.Brazile's admission provides a solid foundation for understanding what motivated Rich to leak to DNC emails to Wikileaks in the first place.

2016 年 7 月 25 日，蒂莫西·李 (Timothy Lee) 在 Vox 上发表了一篇报道，报道了维基解密 (Wikileaks) 对民主党全国委员会 (DNC) 的爆料，发现许多报道显示，民主党全国委员会更倾向于支持克林顿 (Clinton) 的竞选团队，而不是伯尼·桑德斯 (Bernie Sanders) 。 2017 年 11 月，民主党全国委员会前主席唐娜布拉齐尔 (Donna Brazile) 证实，民主党全国委员会系统性地支持克林顿，而不是桑德斯·布拉齐尔的承认为理解里奇最初向 DNC 泄露给维基解密的电子邮件的动机提供了坚实的基础。

In an August 2016 Dutch television interview,Assange firmly hinted that Rich's murder was related to his leaking of DNC emails to Wikileaks:

在 2016 年 8 月的一次荷兰电视采访中，阿桑奇坚定地暗示，里奇的死与他向维基解密泄露民主党全国委员会的电子邮件有关 :

Assange:Whistleblowers go to significant efforts to get us material and often significant risks.There was a 27-year old that works for the DNC who was shot in the back…murdered..for unknown reasons as he was walking down the street in Washington.

阿桑奇 : 告密者为了获取我们的资料付出了巨大的努力，而且常常冒着巨大的风险。有一个为民主党全国委员会工作的 27 岁的人在背后被枪杀了…不知什么原因，当他走在华盛顿的大街上。

Host:That was just a robbery wasn't it?

主持人 : 那只是一次抢劫，不是吗？

Assange:No.There's no finding.

阿桑奇 : 不。没有发现。

Host:What are you suggesting?

主持人 : 你有什么建议？

Assange:I am suggesting that our sources take risks and they become concerned to see things occurring like that.

阿桑奇 : 我是在建议我们的消息来源承担风险，他们开始担心看到这样的事情发生。

Wikileaks then offered a$20,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of those responsible,fueling the rumors that Rich was Wikileaks source.

维基解密随后悬赏 20,000 美元，悬赏那些导致相关人员被定罪的信息，从而助长了关于维基解密的消息来源是里奇的谣言。

Those who claimed that Rich was responsible for the release of the DNC emails were vilified and forced to backtrack on their claims.Here's how Wikipedia summarized the situation:

那些声称里奇对民主党全国委员会电子邮件的泄露负有责任的人遭到诽谤，被迫收回自己的说法。下面是维基百科对情况的总结 :

Fact-checking websites like PolitiFact.com,[5][8] Snopes.com,[9] and FactCheck.org stated that these theories were false and unfounded.[4] The New York Times,Los Angeles Times,and The Washington Post wrote that the promotion of these conspiracy theories was an example of fake news.[10][11][12]

事实核查网站，如 politifact.com ， [5][8]snopes.com ， [9] 和 factcheck.org 说，这些理论是错误的，没有根据的。 [4] 《纽约时报》、《洛杉矶时报》和《华盛顿邮报》都写道，宣扬这些阴谋论是假新闻的一个例子。 [10][11]

Influential figures such as Fox News and Sean Hannity were forced through litigation to abandon their investigations into Rich's murder due to his parents leading the chargecondemning"conspiracy theories".

福克斯新闻频道 (Fox News) 和肖恩•汉尼提 (Sean Hannity) 等有影响力的人物被迫通过诉讼，放弃对里奇谋杀案的调查，因为他的父母带头谴责了 " 阴谋论 " 。

Rich's parents condemned the conspiracy theorists and said that these individuals were exploiting their son's death for political gain,and their spokesperson called the conspiracy theorists"disgusting sociopaths".

里奇的父母谴责了这些阴谋论者，说这些人利用儿子的死来谋取政治利益，他们的发言人称这些阴谋论者是 " 令人厌恶的反社会人格分子 " 。

A story published by two Fox News reporters,Malia Zimmerman and Ed Butowsky,in May 2017 was subsequently pulled from the news site and Hannity also stopped covering the story.

2017 年 5 月，两名福克斯新闻记者马利亚·齐默尔曼和艾德·布托斯基发表的一篇报道随后被从新闻网站上撤下，汉尼提也停止了报道。

Even Bongino's book,Spygate,, failed to mention the Rich connection and what this meant to the whole Russia hacking narrative,which he uncritically endorsed as valid.

甚至邦吉诺的著作《间谍门》也没有提到与里奇的联系，以及这对整个俄罗斯黑客叙事的意义，他不加批判地认为这种说法是正确的。

After Fox News reporters and Hannity suspended their investigations into Rich leaking the DNC emails,only alternative news sources were willing to investigate the available evidence.Most prominent among them was National Security Agency(NSA)whistleblower,William Binney,who was among the first to conclude that Rich was responsible for the leaking and that Russia was being framed by the Deep State.

在福克斯新闻记者和汉尼提暂停了对里奇泄露民主党全国委员会电子邮件的调查之后，只有其他新闻来源愿意调查现有的证据。其中最著名的是美国国家安全局 (NSA) 的告密者威廉•宾尼 (William Binney) ，他是第一批得出结论认为，里奇应对泄密事件负责，俄罗斯是被 " 深层国家 " 陷害的人之一。

Binney,a former Technical Director at the NSA,together with Ray McGovern,a 27 year CIA analyst,wrote on September 20,2017:

前国家安全局技术总监宾尼和 27 岁的中央情报局分析员雷·麦戈文在 2017 年 9 月 20 日写道 :

We stand by our main conclusion that the data from the intrusion of July 5,2016,into the Democratic National Committee's computers,an intrusion blamed on"Russian hacking,"was not a hack but rather a download/copy onto an external storage device by someone with physical access to the DNC.

我们坚持自己的主要结论，即 2016 年 7 月 5 日侵入民主党全国委员会 (Democratic National Committee) 电脑的数据不是黑客攻击，而是有实际权限访问 DNC 的人在外部存储设备上进行的下载 / 复制。这种攻击被归咎于 " 俄罗斯黑客 " 。

After Q Anon publicly emerged in late October 2017,Seth Rich was soon mentioned in several posts alluding to his role as the true source for the Wikileaks DNC email leaks,and that he was murdered as a result by hitmen tied to the MS-13 criminal gang and the Clintons.

2017 年 10 月底， QAnon 公开亮相后，赛斯·里奇 (Seth Rich) 很快在几个帖子中被提及，这些帖子暗指他是维基解密 (Wikileaks) 的民主党全国委员会 (DNC) 电子邮件泄露事件的真正来源，他被与 MS-13 犯罪团伙和克林顿夫妇有关的杀手杀害。

The alternative news investigation into Rich's role in leaking the DNC emails subsequently languished but gained renewed life a year later on October 4,2018,when the NSA responded to a Freedom of Information request that showed Rich had indeed been communicating with Assange.In their response to a FOIA request filed by attorney Ty Clevenger about information concerning Seth Rich and Julian Assange,the NSA wrote:

一年后的 2018 年 10 月 4 日，美国国家安全局对信息自由的要求做出回应，表明里奇确实与阿桑奇有联系。在回应《信息自由法》要求时，美国国家安全局的泰·克莱文格律师提交了有关塞斯·里奇和朱利安·阿桑奇的信息 :

Your request has been processed under the provisions of the FOIA.Fifteen documents(32 pages)responsive to your request have been reviewed by this Agency as required by the FOIA and have found to be currently and properly classified in accordance with Executive Order 13526.These documents meet the criteria for classification as set forth in Subparagraph©of Section 1.4 and remains classified TOP SECRET and SECRET.

您的请求已根据《信息自由法》的规定得到处理。根据《信息自由法》的要求，本机构审查了十五份文件 (32 页 ) ，发现这些文件目前根据第 13526 号行政命令进行了适当的分类。这些文件符合第 1.4 节第项规定的分类标准，仍然属于绝密和机密。

Since the FOIA request and the NSA response were not released,the NSA's startling admission received no attention by the mainstream media,and only a few alternative media sources picked up the story.One of these was an April 19,2019,article by Mark McCarty who cited a blog post published six months earlier(October 23,2018)that first discussed the NSA FOIA response.

由于《信息自由法》的要求和国家安全局的回应没有公布，国家安全局令人吃惊的承认没有引起主流媒体的注意，只有少数替代性媒体报道了这个故事。其中之一是 2019 年 4 月 19 日的一篇文章，作者是马克·麦卡蒂 (Mark McCarty) ，他引用了六个月前 (2018 年 10 月 23 日 ) 发表的一篇博客文章，该文首先讨论了 NSA 对《信息自由法》的回应。

McCarty raised important questions over the precise language used in Clevenger's FOIA request and what this meant in terms of documents being withheld.In his April 19,2019,article he pointed out that many of these questions were resolved by Binney in an April 17 interview:

麦卡蒂提出了一些重要的问题，包括克莱文格的《信息自由法》请求中使用的准确措辞，以及这些措辞在文件被扣留方面意味着什么。在 2019 年 4 月 19 日的文章中，他指出宾尼在 4 月 17 日的采访中解决了许多问题 :

"Ty Clevenger has FOIAed information from NSA asking for any data that involved both Seth Rich and also Julian Assange.

" 泰·克莱文格从国家安全局获取信息，要求提供任何涉及塞斯·里奇和朱利安·阿桑奇的数据。

And they responded by saying we've got 15 files,32 pages,but they're all classified in accordance with executive order 13526 covering classification,and therefore you can't have them.

他们回应说，我们有 15 份文件， 32 页，但它们都是根据 13526 号行政命令分类的，因此你不能拥有它们。

That says that NSA has records of communications between Seth Rich and Julian Assange.I mean,that's the only business that NSA is in — copying communications between people and devices."

这说明国家安全局有塞斯·里奇和朱利安·阿桑奇之间的通讯记录。我的意思是，这是国家安全局唯一从事的业务——复制人与设备之间的通信。 "

Binney's interpretation of what the NSA had admitted through FOIA is astounding in its implications.The single issue that has come to dominate analyses of the 2016 election is that Russia hacked the DNC and interfered with the integrity of the US Presidential election by passing this on to Wikileaks.

宾尼对美国国家安全局通过《信息自由法》承认的内容的解释，其含义令人震惊。 2016 年大选分析中最主要的一个问题是，俄罗斯黑客攻击了民主党全国委员会，并通过将其转交给维基解密，干扰了美国总统大选的公正性。

This spawned the nearly two-year Mueller investigation into Trump's collusion with Russia,which generated reams of anti-Trump and anti-Russia stories in the mainstream media.Both Trump and Russia were vilified by a hostile media that was anxious to promote the Russia hacking narrative,and ridiculing anyone suggesting that Rich was the true source of the DNC info being released to Wikileaks,not Russia.

这导致穆勒对特朗普与俄罗斯的勾结进行了近两年的调查，在主流媒体上引发了大量反特朗普和反俄罗斯的报道。特朗普和俄罗斯都受到了敌对媒体的诽谤，这些媒体急于宣传俄罗斯的黑客故事，嘲笑任何认为维基解密 (Wikileaks) 泄露民主党全国委员会 (DNC) 信息的真正来源是里奇而不是俄罗斯的人。

The NSA's admission is the first concrete sign that the Deep State and the mainstream media are about to be exposed for willfully lying and misrepresenting the truth.Assange is all but certain to be extradited to the USA,and will reveal what he knows about Rich and his connection to the DNC email dumps.

美国国家安全局的承认是第一个具体的迹象，表明深州和主流媒体即将被曝光故意撒谎和歪曲事实。阿桑奇几乎肯定会被引渡到美国，他将披露他所知道的关于里奇的信息以及他与民主党全国委员会电子邮件转储的联系。

While the questioning and extradition of Assange are likely to take an extended period of time,it's worth emphasizing that the truth is already known to the NSA,which is keeping this classified for the moment.It is not known when and how this information will be released,and whether it will be done through Assange,the NSA or some other process.

虽然审讯和引渡阿桑奇可能需要很长一段时间，但值得强调的是，事实真相已经为美国国家安全局所知，该机构目前将此事保密。目前尚不清楚这些信息何时以及如何公布，也不知道是否会通过阿桑奇、美国国家安全局或其他途径公布。

Despite knowledge of the Rich and Assange connection,the NSA and its two directors since the DNC hacking–Admiral Mike Rogers(2014-2018)and General Paul Nakasone(2018-)–have done very little to publicly alter the mainstream news narrative that Russia had hacked the DNC servers;and that Rich's murder was unrelated to the DNC documents that Wikileaks released less than two weeks after his murder.

尽管知道里奇和阿桑奇之间的关系，美国国家安全局及其自民主党全国委员会 (DNC) 黑客袭击事件发生以来的两位主管——海军上将迈克·罗杰斯 (Mike Rogers ， 2014-2018) 和中曾根将军 (Paul Nakasone ， 2018-)—— 在公开改变主流媒体关于俄罗斯黑客攻击民主党全国委员会服务器的报道方面做得很少 ; 里奇的死与维基解密在他被谋杀不到两周后公布的民主党全国委员会文件无关。

Why did the NSA stand by and allow the accusations of Russian hacking to grow to the extent that relations with Russia have been severely damaged,economic sanctions imposed,and a two-year long investigation was established into potential collusion between the Trump Presidential Campaign and the Russians?

为什么美国国家安全局袖手旁观，任由俄罗斯黑客的指控发展到与俄罗斯的关系遭到严重破坏、经济制裁、以及对特朗普总统竞选团队和俄罗斯人之间可能存在的勾结进行了长达两年的调查的地步？

One answer worth exploring is that the Deep State had much to fear about a potential collaboration between Trump and Putin in revealing many advanced technology secrets possessed by their respective intelligence services;secrets which President John F.Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev unsuccessfully attempted to unlock 56 years ago,with tragic consequences for both.

一个值得探索的答案是，深层国家非常担心特朗普和普京之间的潜在合作，以泄露他们各自情报部门拥有的许多先进技术秘密 ;56 年前，约翰肯尼迪总统和苏联总理尼基塔·赫鲁晓夫曾试图解开这些秘密，但未能成功，这对双方都造成了悲剧性的后果。

[Note:An expanded audio version of the above article is available on YouTube.]

[ 注 : 上述文章的扩展音频版可在 YouTube 上获得。 ]

[Update 4/25/2019–A May 16,2017 article published by the Free Thought Project discussed reports about alleged email communications between Julian Assange and Seth Rich provided by a former homicide detective,Rod Wheeler,from confidential FBI sources.A week later,Wheeler's comments were retracted.It's important to note that the 2018 NSA FOIA release confirms that the email correspondence did take place and was being tracked by the NSA]

[ 更新 4/25/2019-2017 年 5 月 16 日自由思想项目发表的文章讨论了关于朱利安·阿桑奇和赛斯·里奇之间所谓的电子邮件通信的报道，该报道由前凶杀案侦探罗德·惠勒提供，来自 FBI 的机密消息来源。一周后，惠勒的评论被撤回。值得注意的是， 2018 年美国国家安全局的《信息自由法》确认了电子邮件确实发生了，并被国家安全局追踪