Quote (ampoo @ Mar 24 2019 02:14pm)
there was never a need to push this narrative except trying to undermine trumps legitimacy
Originally the main purpose was to undermine and delegitimize the
Wikileaks bombshells. As soon as Wikileaks started revealing malfeasance by the DNC and Hillary's campaign, they responded by saying Wikileaks was conspiring with Russia and got as far as making CNN claim it was illegal to possess Podesta's emails. It was only really going into the final weeks of the election and thereafter that it got twisted into undermining Trump, and throughout the 'winter of leaks' of '16-17 it became a full blown effort for the democrats to deflect from Hillary Clinton's loss and the blatant rigging by the DNC, to instead light a fire under Trump's ass.
One thing notably absent from this top-line summary is Wikileak's role in all this. As far as we've seen from other Mueller filings, Wikileaks never knowingly colluded with Russians and there is no evidence they knew for sure who Guccifer 2.0 actually was, only that they held the same suspicions everyone in America did- it was all over the media speculating at the time. But all the summary mentions is Wikileaks being one of the organizations the information was disseminated through. Now, it might be premature to say the absence of evidence is evidence of absence, but I'd imagine that
if there was such a bombshell about Wikileaks, there would have been an indictment issued on whatever bogus legal pretext and it would have been mentioned in the report. So I think that's been put to rest, too.