Binney Reveals Russiagate Hoax to Sputnik: ‘We Have Absolute Proof,’ No One Hacked DNC

Aug. 12, 2020 (EIRNS)—Sputnik International today published a thorough interview with former NSA Technical Director Bill Binney, in which he provides the detailed forensic evidence that the DNC computers could not possibly have been hacked by Russia and that therefore, the entire premise of Russiagate is a “farce.”

As Sputnik explains, “Documents published by WikiLeaks that belonged to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) could not have been hacked via the internet and must have been initially downloaded from within the U.S., according to an investigation by members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).”

Binney explains the technical details to the interviewer to prove this point, and quotes the testimony given by CrowdStrike’s Shawn Henry who said his company “didn’t see the data exfiltrated” from the DNC computers.

Binney also pointed out that the NSA “never said they saw any of the data transferring anywhere on any line. And that’s because it didn’t, it went on a thumb drive, you know, that’s the difference. That was one of the main reasons I said that this was not a hack. Because if it was, NSA would have it.” Asked if there were more to investigate, Binney said that, “as far as I’m concerned, we have absolute proof that this whole thing. ... Russiagate is a fabrication. It was a fabrication of the FBI, CIA and the DOJ primarily, but also included the State Department and [Department for Homeland Security] and a number of other departments.”

The VIPS leader also debunked the idea that Julian Assange would get a fair trial, were he to be extradited to the U.S. The U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, where he would be tried, is a “pro-CIA court,” he explained. “That’s a court that’s pro CIA because it’s in that jurisdiction of CIA. This is why they picked that court, because it’s pro CIA, and whatever national security issues come up, they will always go with that national security. So, you have a prejudiced judge in a court to begin with,” and a tainted jury pool made up of government employees. Julian Assange published data he was given, Binney added. “So has the New York Times, the Guardian, all the major publications, the Washington Post, they’ve all done that. So why aren’t they being charged also?”

He concludes: “[I]f you accept their premise—of the U.S. government—that means that any journalist anywhere in the world, publishing any article that exposes crimes by the U.S. government, the U.S. government can charge them with conspiracy to violate national security. So, every reporter in the world is now liable based on that [premise].”